Putting politics aside

A reporter I worked with in Washington D.C., an old-school

journalist who was smart, fair, tough and a heck of writer, used to

talk about the days when even the bitterest foes on Capitol Hill

would put aside their differences when the day was done, adjourn to a

bar or similar establishment and, essentially, be pals. They

disagreed vehemently on issues but didn’t hate each other.

In many ways, that dynamic changed when Newt Gingrich led his

revolution in the mid-’90s. Partisanship became a full-time job.

Or not.

When we at the Pilot heard that Rep. Dana Rohrabacher, about as

conservative as they come, and Rep. Barney Frank, who falls even

further to the liberal edge of the political spectrum, were teaming

up on an issue, it struck us as “odd” given the decade-long state of

affairs in Washington. The pairing seemed even more unusual given

that this summer Frank headlined a fund-raiser for Gerrie Schipske,

the Democrat challenging Rohrabacher this fall.

Not so, Frank told me in a quick -- he talks faster than most New

Englanders, even -- interview Wednesday.

“The way things work, if you can’t work across partisan lines or

ideological lines, you shouldn’t be in the government,” Frank said.

He and Rohrabacher do differ on “lots of issues,” he continued,

but “we differ in a civil way.” So when they agree, there is no

reason for them not to work together.

“A., we agree on some issues,” he said. “And we have respect for

each other.”

Still, there is one difference that will not change: “I’d like the

Democrats to be in control of the House. He’d like the Republicans to

be.”

All’s indeed fair.

INSIDE OUT

One of the oldest political paradigms appears to be in full effect

in Costa Mesa.

Incumbents are running on how good they say things are, while

challengers are -- actually, challenger is -- attacking the present

leadership for lacking the ability to lead.

At the Costa Mesa Senior Center on Tuesday, 75 or so people

watched as City Council candidate Allan Mansoor took aim at City

Hall, firing off that leaders are misspending money, ignoring the

growing crime rate and leaving the Westside to stagnate.

It’s a straight-forward formula for lesser-known outsider

candidates. And given that Mansoor is the only one of the five who

can lay legitimate claim to being a candidate of change, a degree, at

least, of this election could hinge on whether residents are unhappy

with how City Hall is doing its job. At the least, his chance for

winning is heavily reliant on an unhappy electorate.

What was interesting was who came to City Hall’s defense, given

that Mansoor’s opponents for the two seats up for grabs on Nov. 5 are

all City Hall insiders: Mayor Linda Dixon, Councilman Gary Monahan,

Planning Commission Chairwoman Katrina Foley and Planning

Commissioner Bill Perkins.

It was Dixon, who didn’t exactly dwell on Mansoor’s comments, but

clearly responded to them during her own answers to a trio of the

most asked questions from the seniors in the audience.

From here, the question is: Will their campaigns develop into a

battle against each other?

* S.J. CAHN is the managing editor. He can be reached at (949)

574-4233 or by e-mail at steven.cahn@latimes.com.