What we have here is a failure to communicate.
Our elected Superintendent of Public Instruction, Tom Luna, has failed to adequately respond to last week’s AP story that he exaggerated his work with the USDE.
Rather than defend himself directly, Tom chose to cite a response written by his former boss, Bill Hansen. Hansen’s piece attacked the AP reporter without citing any facts to prove those allegations false. Rather than list sources proving Tom Luna was a presidential appointee (and not a Schedule C employee hired by a Pocatello bureaucrat), Hansen asserted that Luna “is a man of integrity”. We can see the argument will not be made with facts, but with emotional appeals to his reputation. Maybe Tom has not heard that Kimball Mason ruined that approach for everyone.
Let me be clear to Tom Luna: your integrity is in now in question, and only facts can answer for you.
If Tom Luna’s response is going to be attacking the messenger rather than answering the allegations, he will find himself facing the fastest recall election ever seen in Idaho. We will not put up with his shenanigans and dodging this serious issue.
Here is the gist of the reply I received from tomluna.idaho@gmail.com Monday:
“The [Associated Press] story by Jesse Harlan Alderman … is sloppy, slanted and much ado about nothing.”
Simply put, there has never, ever been any question that Tom Luna was a
presidential appointee to the U.S. Department of Education. Tom’s capsulation [sic] of
his work in Washington, D.C., has been accurate to the letter. Mr. Alderman
misrepresents my statements in order to support his faulty premise that Luna
“embellished” his resume and “misrepresented his position” with the department.
Mr. Alderman’s premise is tenuous at best. Even he acknowledged he was
“splitting hairs.”Tom Luna is a man of integrity, and until today that integrity has never been
questioned. In fact, Tom’s work at the department was stellar. He represented
Secretary Paige and President Bush with honor and distinction. The voters of
Idaho have spoken and they are anxious to let Tom get to work improving student
achievement.Mr. Alderman and the Associated Press owe Tom an apology.
I followed up an immediate email, asking him to answer the specific allegations. Tom Luna has failed to respond. I called Governor Risch’s office for their view, and was told they did not anticipate Risch to have any comment on this scandal.
I will make this easy for Tom Luna. I will spell out the allegations directly, and provide links to the evidence, and he can respond to them directly, with evidence of his own. One would think Tom Luna would be relieved to have the opportunity to clear his name of these allegations.
Discrepancy #1: Luna claims he was a presidential appointee, however the 2004 Plum Book (page 55) describes Thomas R. Luna as an “SC” type of appointment, defined on page 5 as a “Schedule C Excepted Appointment”. A presidential appointment is defined as “PA” or “PAS” types. How does Luna counter this evidence?
Discrepancy #2: Luna claims he was a “Senior Advisor”, however the same 2004 Plum Book entry describes Thomas R. Luna as a “Special Assistant”. How does Luna counter this evidence? Does Tom Luna have a certificate or promotion papers that describes him as a “Senior Advisor”?
Discrepancy #3: Luna’s federal pay grade is described in the same 2004 Plum Book entry as a GS-15, indeed a few pay levels lower than what a presidential appointee would earn. This bolsters the AP reporter’s argument. How does Tom Luna counter this evidence? Does Tom Luna have a pay stub describing him at a higher pay grade?
Discrepancy #4: Luna claims he had several meetings with President George Bush and Bill Hansen, but the AP story said Hansen did not recall any. Given that Bill Hansen has attacked the AP story, does Bill Hansen now remember these meetings with President Bush and Tom Luna? Does Tom Luna have records of any meetings with President Bush? (Note: Staged photos in front of the desk are not enough.)
Let me also give one warning against a tactic I already saw reported. The tactic was to try claiming that Luna was “considered” a presidential appointee. This tactic is exactly like Bill Clinton’s arguing the meaning of the word “is” is, and Idaho expects better than a Clintonian defense strategy from Tom Luna.
If Tom Luna has an ounce of integrity, he will immediately provide proof that he was a indeed a presidential appointee, that he indeed met with President Bush, and that he was indeed a “Senior Advisor” rather than a “special assistant”.
Luna has said he will demand accountability from our schools. We Idahoans will demand accountability from Luna to answer these allegations before he lays his fingers on our schools.
Am I blowing this up to be a bigger deal than it really is? That is for you to decide. I have already decided I do not want a liar in charge of my children’s education. I have seen evidence suggesting Tom Luna has lied to Idaho, and I have witnessed Tom Luna not providing counter-evidence to prove he has not lied to Idaho.
Penalties for lying on a resume in the private sector include dismissal and the employer being able to sue the candidate. Can Idaho voters file a class-action lawsuit against Tom Luna for lying to us about his experience and past work history? Would Governor Risch or Otter take the step to fire Luna? Would Luna resign on his own?
If these allegations are proven true, what is the soonest a recall petition can be started against Tom Luna? Tom Luna barely won a slim majority to become our superintendent, and he is vulnerable to a recall petition if he wants to keep playing games with these questions.
What do you think?
Popularity: 10%
Related posts:
Gato got runned over by Marcus many moons ago. Be ye daft, 2486? 
Let's have a new poll, alright, Joe?
Loading ...
{ 54 comments… read them below or add one }
I expect Tom Luna to handle this request with the frankness, openness and honesty we’ve seen in the likes of Dick Cheney. . .
Joe -
Don’t know how Luna will respond, but neither Risch nor Otter has the authority to fire him, any more than Kempthorne or Risch could have fired Marilyn Howard. He’s an elected official, and can only be removed by recall or impeachment.
The latter won’t even be considered, and recall has a pretty formidable burden simply to get it on the ballot – it would require a substantial investment in time and money to get the number of statewide signatures.
I don’t think that a class action lawsuit could be brought. IANAL, but I believe that class actions are civil suits brought to recover specific damages (plus penalties/attorney’s fees, etc). That doesn’t apply here.
Luna should admit that he lied/misrepresented/padded his resume. Whether he does or not, everything he does should be held up to examination, just as with any other elected official. He hasn’t started out well, IMO.
I blame the Idaho voters for putting this clown in office over a much better-qualified candidate.
We are reaping what we have sown.
sour grapes — —– — — – —
[Site Admin: Edited for name-calling]
It really smells of another liberal witchhunt to me. What is the point? Any of the mentioned allegations in this opinion could have been researched and expounded months prior to the Nov. 7th elections and I am sure that if anyone of liberal leaning would have deemed them noteworthy, they would have been published by every means possible, as often as necessary, to drill them into the minds of every potential voter. Mr. Luna brings to the table some new ideas that might really benefit those in this state that we are pretending to care about; our young. Some old crows however, are really more concerned about politics and unions and job security than they are about education. Doesn’t it seem that while they squawk and cry about the abhorant state of education in Idaho; their only answer is to throw more money in the pot; and that new ideas like vouchers and merit pay for teachers are met with such resistance that one might be led to believe that anyone espousing such thought is tantamount to a communist of the 1950’s? I believe that if the democrats in this state would honestly evaluate the thoughts and the ideals of our population here; and then formulate programs and platforms that were representitive of that populous rather than trying to emulate the Hillary Clinton and Ted Kennedy types in their party, we might actually have a chance to have a working two party system in this state that would benefit us all.
Thanks for your tangent manybees.
Back to my point. I am not suggesting we start investigating all aspects of Luna’s life until we find some dirt (a Republican strategy), and I’m not suggesting we squawk and block Luna at every step just for the sake of making his life difficult (both a Republican and Democratic strategy).
Yes, it absolutely should have been brought up during the election season, and all Idaho reporters should be kicking themselves now for it.
I am bringing up this specific issue because it smells like a lie. An allegation has been made, and Luna responded by attacking the messenger instead of pointing to evidence against the allegation. This is exactly like a criminal tearing apart a cop’s conduct instead of responding to the criminal charges (how liberal of Luna, ehh?)
These are serious allegations if Luna lied. Why would Luna not want to put these allegations to rest as quickly as possible if he has evidence to the contrary?
If I fudged on my resume to get a job, I would be fired. I think we should hold Luna to the same standard as the rest of us – recall election!
If Tom Luna cannot prove his side of these allegations, Tom Luna must admit he lied to Idaho.
If Tom Luna must admit he lied to Idaho, I think he should resign.
I think I could forgive this circumstance for most any other state office, but he is our school leader.
What would you do if you found your child’s principal had lied in this same manner to get their job?
Why should it be any different for Tom Luna?
Perhaps MY statement was not direct enough to be interpreted as anything more than a tangent so let me restate in simpler terms. Whether we are willing to admit it or not lying has made itself part of politics; not that it is okay, but it is reality. People even seem to want to be lied to when the perpetrator or the subject agrees with their personal leanings. Politicians in both parties pad their resumes and only little more than most of the rest of us. I read through dozens of resumes each year searching out new employees and I know as well as anyone else that half the stuff there is crap. Hence the interview process. I sincerely doubt that Tom Luna was voted for by very many because of mistruths alledgedly padded into his resume. Furthermore I would venture that it was mostly the same base of voters that elected the rest of the Republican candidates in the state; in other words, voting party rather than candidate. I appreciate the desire for honesty. I desire it as much as anyone but I do not feel that we accomplish anything good as a society by constantly striving to unseat our elected officials by scrutinizing their past in order to create turmoil in said office and and thus impede their ablility to function, be they Republican or Democrat. We would be well advised to know what we need to know before we cast our ballots.
One more thing; I would like to thank you for providing this public format. It is a valuable asset to our community.
Thanks manybees, that was much clearer.
I have heard of people who lie on their resume, and I think that’s ridiculous. Given that anything can be found out with a little digging, who are these idiots that think they can get away with it.
If Tom Luna could have been elected without embellishing his resume, then why did he feel the need to do so?
I am not upset about what Tom Luna may have smoked in his youth, I’m upset that (A) he lied to us all in the last few months and (B) he has chosen to attack the questioner’s motives instead of responding to the charges.
Can we trust Tom Luna to be honest in his dealings with our government or schools now? Can we trust Tom Luna when he publishes a report claiming success with his programs?
I no longer trust Tom Luna. He has still not responded to this or other media questions. His only response has been to let his buddy Bill Hansen attack the AP reporter for him.
Be a man, Tom Luna. Answer these questions directly.
You state that you no longer trust Tom Luna. I believe that trust is a relative value based on experiences and I can see the basis for your assessment but I have to believe that you are not naive. Did you trust him a month ago? Four years ago? Are there any politicans that you do trust? Would you agree that some of the greatest leaders, doing the most good in this country were also great liars? Is not history replete with the evidence?
Got me there! I must admit I do not trust any politicians.
I also have not seen evidence that all politicians have lied. I have seen the evidence that Tom Luna lied. When other leaders are proven to have lied, I definitely condemn them (search for Kimball Mason above).
Tom Luna is coming into office skating on thin ice as it is, with little experience and winning by only 618 votes.
Now it turns out he lied about his experience, a fact which if known about during the election undoubtedly would have cost him at least 618 votes.
And Tom Luna is now not even man enough to answer. I could half respect him if he admitted he stretched the truth and apologized. I would drop the issue even.
But I don’t think Tom Luna has the courage to admit he lied. Because liars, cheaters, theives, and cowards go hand-in-hand. If someone does one they will do the rest.
Very well then. We must take you at your word and I will assume then that with the same destain that you condemn Mr. Luna, you also find the lying of Bill Clinton, John Kerry, Sandy Berger, Dan Rather, Richard Nixon, Oliver North, etc. just as repulsive? Can we call into question all of the distortions of truth that we heard from Butch Otter and Jerry Brady?
My point is simply this; Politics is a dirty art. Anyone who ever gets far there learns the value of compromise and diplomacy and perception. In a perfect world, maybe it would not be so, but if I told you we would be able to achieve that; I would be lying.
Yes, I found all those liars’ actions repulsive.
I also agree many other candidates distorted the truth for their advantage.
However, there is no evidence that Brady or Otter completely lied about an issue. A distortion of the truth is frustrating, but not a lie.
It appears Tom Luna has lied to Idaho.
It appears Tom Luna will not be a man and admit he lied. Instead he has attacked the messenger and ignored Idaho’s questions.
Can we trust Luna to make accurate education reports after he has lied to get elected? Can we trust Luna to not distort his data to make himself look better?
If you want Tom Luna to respond directly to the accusation that he lied, hit the
“Share it with others: Email this article to your friend(s)”
link above, and paste intomluna.idaho@gmail.com for the friend’s email address.
Ask him yourself why he will not respond to these serious allegations about his character.
So it is interesting to see the same type of resume lying from a Trump Mortgage executive as what Tom Luna has apparently engaged in.
In both cases, Tom Luna and the Trump Mortgage executive apparently grossly exaggerated their key work titles and work experiences.
A bedrock conservative value is the wisdom of private business over government bureaucracy. Will Donald Trump fires his liar?
Would Tom Luna have the backbone to admit he lied and resign, or do Idaho’s voters need to “fire” Tom Luna with a recall election?
So another week has gone by with the charges still standing that Tom Luna lied about his federal experience.
Another week has gone by with Tom Luna refusing to respond to the charges that he lied. His first and only response has been to cite the article by his buddy Hansen, who simply just attacked the AP reporter without a shred of evidence that the reporter did anything wrong.
It turns out Tom Luna was secretly sworn into office last Wednesday, December 27. Will Tom Luna dare face a public swearing in? Or will Tom Luna be too afraid to face Idahoans who may protest his lies, and shout out his speech with calls to answer the allegations against him?
I have to cast a ’shame-on-you’ to Idaho’s media also. The only thing I have seen reported is the initial AP story. I have not heard or seen any other Idaho news outlet try to do any follow-up activity to prove the allegations (which are available with one click) or to ask Tom Luna to respond with more substance than he has.
I will not give this up. I think Tom Luna has made a substantial lie against Idahoans, and I will not stop until he addresses it. I cannot believe our media have not pursued this more.
I cannot believe Frank Vandersloot would not personally call on Tom Luna to answer these allegations, since Frank tied his good name to Tom by endorsing him.
Once again, every day or every week, I encourage you to email tomluna.idaho@gmail.com and ask him yourself if he lied, and when he will respond to the charges.
Or call his office at 1-800-432-4601 and ask yourself.
you are aware that the reporter from the AP was fired for lying right or do you just not want to talk about that also Tom has not been sworn in yet check your facts
Thank you robert.
I was not aware that the reporter from the AP was fired for lying, I will look that up right now.
I again point to that link above from the 2004 Plum book, which shows Tom Luna as a GS-15. You looked at that, right?
My fact of Tom Luna being sworn in last Wednesday was published in this morning’s Post Register. Perhaps they had it wrong, but that is where I “checked my facts”.
OK robert, I have to ask you to substantiate your claim. Kind of a “put up or shut up” challenge.
I looked around, and it seems Jesse Harlan Alderman, the AP reporter, has not been fired as you claimed.
The most recent story published by Jesse Harlan Alderman was just a couple days ago about Butch Otter (http://www.spokesmanreview.com/news/bylines.asp?bylinename=Jesse%20Harlan%20Alderman).
Jim Fisher of the Lewiston Tribune wrote that “In the wake of Hansen’s letter, the Associated Press says it is standing by the accuracy of Alderman’s story. It would not be doing that if it believed Hansen’s unsubstantiated charges.”
http://www.sde.state.id.us/webdocs/Dailyednews/06-12-19_Tuesday.htm
So I know where I got my fact about Tom Luna being sworn in last Wednesday (today’s PR), and I see evidence suggesting you are wrong about the AP reporter being fired.
I have to wonder if you will answer to your two errors or if that was a “drive-by” comment?
Another source for Luna’s swearing (Idaho Press Tribune):
Other new state officers have been sworn in, too. Attorney General Lawrence Wasden and Treasurer Ron Crane took their oaths Dec. 21. Ysursa and Superintendent of Public Instruction Tom Luna took theirs on Wednesday. No media attended those ceremonies.
Does anybody else see anything funny about this?
“Very well then. We must take you at your word and I will assume then that with the same destain [sic] that you condemn Mr. Luna, you also find the lying of Bill Clinton, John Kerry, Sandy Berger, Dan Rather, Richard Nixon, Oliver North, etc. just as repulsive?”
What about George Bush, who not only lied about our reasons for invading a sovereign nation, but also about his plans to replace Donald Rumsfeld? What about Reagan’s lying about Iran-Contra?
This whole “culture war” business is getting utterly ridiculous.
According to Idaho laws, it appears Tom Luna’s recall election drive can start 90 days after he first takes office.
I would give him the benefit of the doubt and say 90 days from when he officially takes office (not when he secretly took the oath of office last week).
The recall election drive must turn in eligible voter signatures, 20% of November’s electorate.
Unless, of course, Tom Luna finds some backbone and admits he lied to Idaho. Or one of his election funding sugar daddies pushes him to ‘fess up to Idaho.
How many signatures would 20% be?
According to the ID SoS 20% would be 152,976 registered voters. Practically, that means at least 200K signatures, if not 250K, since there will always be invalid signatures and duplicates in any petition drive. There’s a 75 day window in which those signatures must be gathered, or they become void.
And yes, the 90 days applies starting 1 January.
I haven’t seen any comments about the Luna response where it was stated the reporter acknowledged that he was “splitting hairs.â€
If the reporter in question believes this whole question is one of ’splitting hairs’ then I can’t imagine you can convince even a modicum of Idahoans to sign onto a recall petition.
I think it’s time to get real. And again thanks to John for his highly responsive and accurate rendering of recall procedures and numbers. I wonder Joe, if he could head up the recall efforts in Eastern Idaho??? I imagine he has some democrat connections in the Treasure Valley where you could really stir the pot.
Hint: You lose credibility when you take on the roll of prosecutor/judge/jury/executioner. Asking people for answers and pointing out that they will not answer questions is one thing but making broad sweeping statements that people will be ‘held accountable’ on a ’splitting hairs’ type issue is another.
What’s the old adage something about don’t go after the king unless you sure you kill him type thing. The same is can be said for certain people and this forum in general if what you are seeking is credibility.
If Luna remains silent on this as he well may, then he is just taking a page out of the Clinton playbook. How many acutal press conferences did President Clinton hold? When is the last time Hillary ever held a question and answer session with members of the press?
Politics 101 and i’m sure John will correct me; don’t talk to the media in any format that you don’t have some level of control over. The Clintons played that game and still are, so don’t be surprised if Tom Luna remains silent. After all the ‘King’ will not be killed on the issues you are raising here.
I’ll admit I am totally naive in politics.
I did read that reporter said he was splitting hairs.
I have seen the evidence, and I don’t think it is hair splitting. Tom Luna pumped up his experience in a way that was a lie, not a truth stretch. It was an outright lie.
Because I have seen the evidence, I believe Tom Luna lied. I emailed and called him asking for him to give an explanation, and his only response has been to attack the message.
If he presented contrary evidence, hey that’s great then. However I have seen damning evidence that he lied, and I have witnessed him dodging the issue.
I have no power to do anything against him, but yes I will judge Tom Luna a liar because of the evidence I have seen.
I was reading about California Governor Gray Davis’ recall, and how that only occurred because of a ‘perfect storm’ of events.
I know we don’t have that perfect storm situation in Idaho, mostly because we need 20% of registered voters and California only needed 12.5% of those that actually voted in the last election. Even then the recall effort was bankrolled for millions.
I have no millions or time or even political suavity to pursue it.
I am just furious that Tom Luna has lied to us about his main claim to fame, and he won’t admit it.
Comparing Tom Luna’s actions to Clinton’s infuriates me even more.
I suppose I just have to be angry since I cannot help force him out of office and I certainly cannot force him to be a man and admit his lie.
I appreciate your advice, and I suppose I should back down. I think Tom Luna is more of a lying pauper fraud than a king, though.
Politics 101 and i’m sure John will correct me; don’t talk to the media in any format that you don’t have some level of control over.
Not a correction, really, but more of a comment. Unless you have your own press, a politician’s only real means of exerting control over the media is availability. Certainly I’ve never seen the PR or any of the local TV stations let a politician exert any other form of control over their stories.
Case in point: While on an extended interview with Corey Taule for his piece on door-to-door campaigns, I made the off-hand remark that I’d lost a fair amount of weight. I knew as soon as I said it that that comment would lead (unless I were to say something dumber). For the rest of the campaign, I got seemingly as many questions about my diet as about issues.
Ignoring criticism when one can get away with it is generally an effective technique, though one I don’t endorse. Certainly reasonable people can disagree on whether Luna’s misrepresentation constitutes grounds for a recall, especially when even his antagonists acknowledge that they are “hair splitting”.
Personally, I think that it’s legitimate to call him on it at every reasonable opportunity until he acknowledges and apologizes. It’s legitimate to weigh that in one’s evaluation of his character and actions, both during his term and, should he run for re-election, in that campaign. However, I don’t think that, by itself, it rises to the level at which I’d support a recall petition.
I don’t think it’s likely that it made any difference in the election’s ultimate result, though it certainly could have moved a percent or so. But which way? Based on people I’ve talked to, I doubt that most of those who voted in the election even knew he’d worked at the Dept. of Education – knowlege of that experience might even have been a net positive for Luna.
While I certainly wish the vote had gone the other way, one doesn’t get the luxury of telling voters what factors to weigh when casting their votes.
There’s a certain danger in elevating mistakes, and even “hair splitting” which can be construed as misrepresentation into a case for removing an official from office. Don’t get me wrong: intentional misrepresentations of any kind are wrong, and I’d never condone them; unintentional misrepresentations should be corrected at the earliest opportunity.
But every person who puts his or her name on the ballot is a human being, and as such is always flawed. When we as an electorate create an atmosphere where any and every statement is evaluated with an eye toward recall or impeachment, we encourage exactly the behavior we’re seeing from Luna, and for that matter, the White House. If any mistake is unforgivable, then the only rational strategy is to never admit a mistake.
I don’t buy the premise that all mistakes are unforgivable, but in modern politics it’s a close thing.
Joe Vandal, thank you for your work in bringing this issue to light. Please know that there are many of us in Ada county who are truly outraged by this issue and are working to spread the word.
I don’t buy the argument that this is some sort of small transgression of ethics on Mr. Luna’s part and that we should ignore it and move on.
Do we allow our children to cheat “just a little” on their tests? Do we allow our teachers to lie “just a little” about the academic performance of their classrooms?
If Mr. Luna was willing to misrepresent the truth in order to be elected, it’s safe to assume he’ll misrepresent the truth to justify his job performance during his term. Are we doing our jobs as parents if we allow this?
The worst thing we can do is accept mediocrity in the education of our children. I hold Mr. Luna to the highest standard of accountability, and he is already failing miserably.
So another week has passed without Tom Luna admitting his lie or presenting evidence to support his earlier claim.
I noticed the media published a little more this week on the subject of Tom attacking the messenger, with spotlights shone on the gaping holes in his story and his apparent strategy.
The poll started last week is now running at 76% agreeing Tom should resign or be recalled for his lie, and 24% agreeing Tom should apologize and move on.
Nobody thinks Tom should stay quiet and let it pass, which is exactly what Tom Luna has done so far.
I think if Tom has any connection to the Luna House in Lewiston, he should stay in office to shed some light on the history of this historical building. I have tried for years to get a history on the origin of the name of this building to no avail. If Tom is has no knowledge of the history of the building, then he should be recalled so we can get a democrat in that office.
Your reasoning is awesome 8^) I’ll stick to my issue though.
That’s another thing about recalling Luna: the governor will be the one to appoint Luna’s replacement from the same winning party (per Idaho law).
This should not be seen as a liberal attack on a conservative politician, because the net effect of a replacement conservative politician will be the same.
This should be seen as a man apparently lied to you and me to get a job that we pay. That man is also the state figurehead for achievement in our schools.
I’ll do the stretch and say yes, I do not want my kid to learn Luna lied to reach his achievement, and kept his top job even after missing the crucial time period in which he could have apologized.
March 1st is the first day a recall petition can be started for a recall election against Tom Luna. I have read some other blogs around Idaho picking up the drum beat against Luna. Is anyone looking at the logistics of collecting about 200,000 Idaho voter signatures?
Slogans?
One Idaho blogger is reporting that Luna’s campaign took $5000 more from Simplot than they were legally allowed…
See: http://thesnifftest.typepad.com/the_sniff_test/2007/01/luna_to_emphasi.html
Whoops, that was the wrong link in comment 32. This is the right one: http://mountaingoatreport.typepad.com/the_mountaingoat_report/2007/01/luna_get_excess.html
It appears from the aforementioned link (which itself links to indisputable primary source evidence) that Luna’s campaign accepted double ($5k) what they should have for the general election. This seems to be a strange error, because I imagine these candidates and these corporations are well versed on the rules and following them.
I don’t know what the potential penalties are for this. Realistically, I don’t know that this is much of an issue. It seems like an accounting mistake more than a scandal, and I imagine it will end with Luna returning the extra $5k and maybe paying a small fine (unless Luna takes his other route of attacking the person who brings this to light and then refusing to answer any questions about it).
I was thinking about the mini scandal that almost was with our Mayor Jared Fuhriman signing onto New York Mayor Bloomberg’s gun-control coalition.
I think Fuhriman signed on from the pitch that seemed innocent and generic, and made a simple error in not diligently seeing what they were about. I don’t think it was such a big deal, and I appreciate him more for quickly admitting his error and changing course.
Imagine if Jared Fuhriman did it the Tom Luna way? Mayor Fuhriman would have first had his buddy issue an attack on the people who broke the story, then would have steadfastly pointed to his buddy’s attack without acknowledging anything else on his part.
I think there was a stark difference illustrated between Fuhriman and Luna in how they handled these mistakes.
Once again, when will Tom Luna admit he lied? When will our Idaho media pursue this? Why are we not seeing the evidence being reprinted in the newspapers?
Because the media is “liberal.” Oh wait…
A “Schedule C” is a political appointment. It’s not a “Presidential” appointment, per se, but all Schedule C’s are cleared through the White House office of Presidential personnel. The term “Schedule C” and Presidential appointee are pretty much used interchangably in Washington.
I don’t care if Tom Luna was commonly called “Mr. President”, his pay was not on an executive level, the plum book spells out presidential appointments and he was not one of them.
An intern in one back office of the white house rubber-stamping a piece of paperwork that a Pocatello bureaucrat forwarded to them does not a presidential appointment make.
I’m not even going into the widespread criticism that Luna essentially did nothing but “listen” and produced nothing during his time.
I’m just saying he claims he had a position that he did not. He flat-out lied to you and me, and that lie was the crux of his claim to educational leadership fame.
I’m also saying that I think Tom Luna’s response was cowardly, trying to defame the professional integrity of a reporter instead of answering for himself. Why didn’t he immediately come out and just say “it was considered a PA in Washington” then?
And I still haven’t heard anyone say anything more about Luna accepting $5k more from Simplot than he should have.
Do we not investigate campaign fundraising improprieties in Idaho anymore? Where is the Attorney General’s office in that?
I have heard that the Secretary of State, Ysursa, is very good and this will be investigated. I don’t know that the AG investigates this type of issue.
Oooops, my bad, yes I suppose it would only go to the AG’s office if it got more serious.
I honestly think the extra $5k will turn out to be an accounting error, or that the money will simply be returned. I don’t think it’s a big scandal, however it is strange to not hear more about it for so long after the problem was first identified.
I was happy to hear Luna plans to travel the state after the session is over. I hope he comes to a public forum in Idaho Falls where I can ask him these questions. I don’t mean to try a public attack or embarrassment, but do want a better answer.
I feel bad for you! Spending so much time on something you know deep down is false. Think real hard, you do know that he did not lie, and you do know that he will bring great change to Idaho schools, why does that scare you? I know for a fact that Tom lunas campaign had no form of falsities or lies, in fact, most people know this. Idahohoans are not idiots and they voted in the right man. You need to worry more about things that are relevant and important. Lies about an elected offical are not going to help you sleep at night, and they will not help move along the work that needs to get done. Tom will not waste his time on silly people with trumped up lies, he has a very important job, and a lot of people counting on him. You should offer him support, not tear down a proven leader.
Sara, how exactly are you related to Tom liar Luna?
I would wonder exactly what makes Luna a “proven leader”? His ability to attack the messenger rather than address the question that has been asked? Or perhaps it is his ability to accept double campaign contributions from Simplot, or perhaps it is his lack of experience in public school administration?
I am reminded of a plaque I have seen in an office at work:
“To err is human, to blame it on someone else shows management potential”
You suppose to know what I really “know”, so you are mind reader ehh?
Your rhetoric is loud, but have you looked at the evidence I linked to? Please refute evidence directly rather than relying on your rhetoric.
I have said already I think some of his ideas have promise, and I wholeheartedly and sincerely hope I am wrong and that he is awesome in his job. I am sincere because my kids’ education are at stake.
Thanks for calling me a silly person.
An observation, Joe -
Your comment does something akin to what you’ve taken Sara to task for. By publicly claiming that you have private, adverse knowledge about Sara’s identity and motivations, you’re attempting to discredit her by implication – argumentum ad hominem. But she has little or no recourse to refute you without giving up her anonymity.
It’s your blog of course, but it seems to me that debate is better focused on issues (which you rightly point out that she hasn’t addressed), rather than on personalities.
That’s one of the problems I have with pseudonyms, and why I post under my own name. Harder to imply a hidden agenda when one is open about one’s identity (though I certainly respect your decision not to “out” Sara).
It’s really not too hard to evaluate Sara’s content-free comments and make a judgment about her credibility without knowing anything else about her. It doesn’t matter particularly if Sara is actually Tom – it’s the facts and arguments that matter.
Thank you for the advice, and you are right. I have edited my comment for the better (hopefully).
Your “evidence” you linked to means nothing. you cannot consider a blog fact, after reading the lies in yours how could i trust any blog thrown at me. And any news you may quote is just published opinion, no facts are presented in your argument. And i am sorry, for comming of rude, I just dont understand where you are comming from. I am sorry for wasting your time, and mine. I know you do this for a hobbie, and i would never want to you to come tell me that my Scrapbooking was done wronge, so i will let you continue on your path to…..well i dont know what you are trying to accomplish, but have fun with it, and Lie Away!!!!
Sara, do you need help pulling your head from the sand?
Evidence means nothing?
The evidence that Tom Luna lied about being a presidential appointee is a publication of our government. It is not an analysis that could be interpreted, but a fact book. You fail to acknowledge that.
The other evidence is an image of Tom Luna’s own federal election fund paperwork. The same image can be published on a blog or in the newspaper, so the source should not cause you doubt.
I am willing to personally write Tom Luna an apology letter, and even donate $20 to his re-election campaign if he can prove he was a presidential appointee (none of that “considered an appointee” nonsense). How about that for being open minded?
If you cannot accept evidence then we cannot discuss anything.
And please do not impugn my honesty because your opinion differs and you refuse to examine the evidence.
(I know this is rather short…)
The people of Nampa – where he was from… don’t they also dislike and think of him as a little not right in the head?
Even his name says it, however ironic; it’s just missing ‘tic’.
This is coming from a middle school student’s perspective who’s head a teacher’s rant and has gone to research about this subject.
The Mountain Goat Report blog has uncovered what they think are yet more financial irregularities in Tom Luna’s campaign financing reporting. This appears to be the same type of shenanigan where Tom got too much money from a donor, then re-designated the donation himself in a more legal manner.
The trouble this time seems to be that he cannot make the re-designation, the donor has to do that. Also Luna apparently had about $10k of leftover debt, accepted $20k to cancel it (twice as much as needed), and failed to designate that $20k as being for campaign debt (making folks wonder what he’s doing with it then?)
MGR says Secretary of State Ben Ysursa has responded to their inquiries by launching a review of how all campaign debt is reported, including Tom Luna’s reports.
Tom Luna truly is the worst thing that has happened to Idaho since Larry Craig got caught toe tapping in Minnesota. What a shame people in this state vote party line without taking a good luck at who the candidate is.
I am willing to personally write Tom Luna an apology letter, and even donate $20 to his re-election campaign if he can prove he was a presidential appointee (none of that “considered an appointee” nonsense). How about that for being open minded?
I did research on Tom Luna before the election and found not only what the AP reporter found, I found more than that. I posted the information on several Idaho websites – Redstate was one of them – but I couldn’t get anybody to pay attention. It was like he was ordained and nothing else mattered to either the left or the right.