Cheryl

Home

2-26-08: Joined a lunch-time protest, complete with pickets and skunk--"something stinks at the U-T"--outside the offices of the San Diego Union-Tribune, along with other SDEA Association Representatives, during a one-day training for AR's. The protest was in support of printers and other laborers at the U-T, in dispute with the U-T for such things as the elimination of health care benefits for workers' children, and offer to reduce printer's salaries by 40%.

July 1974 - Western Union Telegram, sent from Cheryl Martin, Stillwater, Oklahoma, to Peter Rodino, Chair, House of Representatives Committee on the Judiciary, Washington, D.C. Message: "GET THE TAPES!"

Fall 1981 - Picketed ribbon-cutting ceremony at Balboa Park, as Reagan administration proceeded with plans to build a new Navy hospital in Balboa Park, over the objections of the local community, and in violation of the City's Charter, which required a 2/3 vote of the people to transfer park land for anything other than park use. The protest was organized by Citizens Coordinate for Century Three.

March 19, 2004

Senator Orrin Hatch

104 Hart Senate Office Building

Washington, D.C. 20510

Dear Senator Hatch:

This letter was inspired by listening to your apology, heard in early March on C-SPAN, regarding one of your staff eavesdropping on the e-mail communications of Democratic senators. You said the golden rule should be the guiding principle for our behavior. I applaud your comment, but your past actions suggest you are guided by Machiavellian doctrine more than the golden rule. I will be eager to learn if your current behavior in the eavesdropping incident is consistent or not with your past behavior.

“Speaking truth to power,” the title of Anita Hill’s book, is the reason for this letter. Your actions during Clarence Thomas’ confirmation hearing were a disservice to Anita Hill and the American public. In “Strange Justice, the Selling of Clarence Thomas,” Jane Mayer and Jill Abramson detailed your orchestration of Thomas’ interview, presenting him the opportunity to play the ‘race card’ and thereby subvert the gathering of facts. Mayer and Abramson described the specifics of Clarence Thomas’ sexual harassment of Anita Hill. They also reported three other women, who worked for Thomas at the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (though they never met Hill before she came forward), had agreed to testify on Hill’s behalf. None was called. You participated directly in an infamous event—perhaps the only time (I hope) a justice as been seated on the Supreme Court by lying in his or her confirmation hearing. If Clarence Thomas had answered questions truthfully, he would not have been confirmed—the quintessence of a mockery of justice.

Until Americans learn that some, but not all, religious people are moral (as some in the Catholic priesthood have exemplified), we will continue to be duped by pious-sounding leaders. You personally are fortunate that more of your constituents have not read “Strange Justice” or “Speaking Truth to Power.” You also benefit from a ‘free press’ that gives you a pass.

I can only guess you rationalize your behavior by thinking Clarence Thomas weighs in on the ‘right’ side. You exemplify a core problem in our polarized country—too many putting loyalty to their political party above loyalty to the country and above the principles upon which it was founded. The ‘free press’ aids and abets you by neglecting the pursuit of the truth. We citizens carry our share of guilt by remaining uninformed and by not holding you and others in power responsible for your actions.

Sincerely,

Cheryl Ede

Cc: The Salt Lake Tribune-Desert Morning News

Daily Herald, Provo, Utah

City News, Ogden, Utah

Deseret Morning News, Orem, Utah

Morgan County News

Times News, Nephi, Utah

Supreme Court Justices

Top of Page

Cheryl's political activism escalated during the presidential campaign in 2004 when, in addition to volunteering for the Kerry campaign, she initiated an effort, via the internet, to inform San Diego Union Tribune readers of important facts not published in the U-T. Cheryl wrote a letter, edited by some of the co-signers, that was published in the U-T as a paid political advertisement, prior to the 2004 presidential election. The U-T published the ad, but managed to hide it visually by placing it at the bottom of the page, surrounded by ads for carpet, paint and spas. For her efforts, Cheryl was designated a "champ" in 11-3-04 San Diego City Beat's column, “Champs & Chumps.” San Diego City Beat (Cheryl Ede is a psychologist, not a guidance counselor; otherwise, the article is correct.)

The San Diego Union Tribune does not archive advertisements. Below is the 10-31-04, p. A-6 letter, referred to in “Champs & Chumps.” Its cost of $2,740 was shared by the 49 signers:

Paid Political advertisement

Dear San Diegans:

The Union-Tribune editorial board fosters President Bush’s distortions. The tip of the iceberg is the board’s spin on Senator Kerry’s use of the word “nuisance” as a justification for its endorsement of Bush for a second term. But in reality, Osama bin Laden has been a nuisance to Bush. When informed on Sept. 12, 2001 that bin Laden and al Qaeda were responsible for the attack, Bush directed his counterterrorism chief to find a link between 9-11 and Saddam Hussein. Further, in preparing us to focus on Bush’s primary enemy (Saddam), Bush stated in a March 13, 2002 press conference he was not concerned that bin Laden had not been captured. And during the final debate on Oct. 13, 2004, Bush said it was a Kerry “exaggeration” when reminded of his precise words.

Not only the editorial pages, but non-opinion sections deny U-T readers balanced news and analysis. On Oct. 3, 2004, a New York Times’ investigative report objectively informed Americans that bad intelligence leading to the war in Iraq was only half the story: President Bush ignored and suppressed intelligence from our Energy Department’s senior nuclear experts who had debunked his agenda. The U-T has published none of this investigative report.

We proudly join others who support Senator Kerry, including John Eisenhower, son of President Dwight Eisenhower and a life-long Republican. He criticizes today’s Republican Party for its failure to be fiscally responsible, citing the $440 billion budget deficit. Eisenhower also objects to: Bush’s failure to respect other nations in foreign affairs, his ill-advised invasion of Iraq without provocation, and his lack of concern for middle class voters and small businesses.

Many top-ranking retired admirals and generals endorse Kerry, including the two highest-ranking retired officers, former heads of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. Further, citing Bush’s foreign policy failures, 180 top diplomats endorse Kerry. They understand supporting Kerry is the best way to support our dedicated troops.

(For the full list, go to www.ncunity.org/jkendorse--this site no longer active.) Active duty officers are prohibited from speaking against the President.

John Kerry will use all the facts at his disposal—not just those that suit his fancy—whether those facts relate to scientific evidence about global warming, correct figures for Medicare’s projected costs, the supporters of Islamic terrorism (such as the Saudi royal family), or effects of outsourcing and tax policy on jobs and the economy. Finally, John Kerry appreciates the fact that we are a divided nation, and he is dedicated to repairing the damage wrought by Bush. Now is the time for all good men and women to come to the aid of our country by choosing a statesman for home and abroad.

Paid For By:

Linda Ann Alvarez	Julie Hollingsworth	Elaine Mills	Sandra Stevens
Betsy Blakely	Trina & Ted Kaplan	Ed Neete	Del Stewart
Mary Jane & Roger Boyd	Larry Krasnow	Linda Olson	Jim Stone
Robert Buchner	Edward & Helen Law	Mary Carolyn Perry	Barbara & Carl Strona
Marie Buckey	Linda Lewis	Bill & Audrey Pitts	Margaret Trader
Gregory Coar	Bob & Veronica Longstreth	Diana Richardson	Robert & Roberta Tugenberg
Hannah Cohen	Xavier Martinez	Fran Selder	Jack Van Sambeek
Victor Cortez	Shirley Mattis	Wayne & Seena Seward	Joseph Vecchio
Susan Crowe	Jere McInerney	Larry & Vivian Sherrill	Amanda Williams
Cheryl Ede	Marie Meadows	Helen K. Smith	CeCe Wilkens

Top of Page

PLEASE NOTE: The individuals listed above attempted to inform San Diegans of the facts, before the 2004 election, because all wanted John Kerry to be our president. Their endorsement of John Kerry in 2004 does not mean they endorse Cheryl Ede for Congress in 2008, even though their names appear on this web page.

On 12-15-2004, Cheryl organized a protest at the San Diego Union-Tribune to protest the lack of coverage of the Ohio recount of the 2004 presidential election. She was interviewed for the San Diego City Beat article, “Taking the fight to them.” San Diego City Beat

February 5, 2006

Mr. Justice Alito

The Supreme Court

Washington, D.C. 20543

Dear Mr. Justice Alito:

Congratulations on your confirmation as Supreme Court Justice. I wish you well.

I was one of many throughout the country who contacted Senators asking that they filibuster your nomination. After watching the hearings on C-SPAN, I was concerned about your judgment in cases referred to by Senator Durbin. I concluded you had empathy for those in power, as in the police officers who “reasonably” thought they had the authorization to strip search a ten-year-old girl; but that in your judicial deliberations, you did not have empathy for the child, and did not put yourself in the shoes of the parent of the child. I hope you will read “Surviving Justice,” which documents the imprisonment of innocent people in our justice system who belatedly were exonerated.

The other major worry was your expansive view of presidential powers via “signing privileges” and the “unitary executive.” My understanding of the Constitution is that the president executes laws made by Congress and interpreted by the courts. “Signing privileges” move the president’s powers into the realms of Congress and the Supreme Court. Perhaps if we did not have a current president who behaves as if he can do whatever he decides—let the facts be damned, who has perfected the art of propaganda and doublespeak so that a new word has entered our lexicon, “truthiness,” and who makes those who oppose him our country’s enemy rather than his opponent—I would not be so worried about a Supreme Court Justice siding with the expansion of presidential powers.

Another factor contributing to my opposition to your appointment was the knowledge that Republican Senators, in the confirmation hearings of Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, were willing to sacrifice justice for selecting their party’s nominee. After reading Abramson and Mayer’s “Strange Justice: The Selling of Clarence Thomas” and Anita Hill’s “Speaking Truth to Power,” my assessment while watching the hearing was confirmed. Primarily Republican Senators were willing to confirm a person who not only had a history of sexual harassment toward female employees while head of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, but who lied while being confirmed to sit on the highest court of the land. My conclusion—most Republican Senators have no credibility; they only follow the party line.

A separate event which leads me to be fearful in anticipating Supreme Court decisions, rather than to feel secure that the highest court will uphold the rights of citizens, was the Supreme Court’s action during the 2000 presidential election. Watching federal marshals take over election headquarters so ballots could not be counted was a chilling experience. It contrasted sharply with my memory of federal troops supporting black students’ rights to attend public high school in Little Rock, Arkansas.

Altogether, these events color my trust in all three branches of our government. Because I also question—if one cannot make decisions about one’s body and life, what freedom does one have—I am fearful about future Supreme Court decisions. I hope my impressions about your confirmation were wrong, and that you attempt to identify with the least among us as you deliberate.

Sincerely,

Cheryl Martin Ede, Ed.D.

Fall 2006, volunteer for Francine Busby for Congress. Cheryl walked precincts in Clairemont, where she worked, during her lunch break and on weekends. When Francine Busby lost the election in November 2006, Cheryl sent her first e-mail to Jess Durfee, asking how the Democratic Party would select its candidate for Congress in the 50^th district in 2008. When Brian Bilbray did not vote to overturn the president’s veto of the Children’s Health Care Initiative in the fall of 2007, Cheryl decided to run for Congress.

2-26-08: Joined a lunch-time protest, complete with pickets and skunk--"something stinks at the U-T"--outside the offices of the San Diego Union-Tribune, along with other SDEA Representatives, during a one-day training for AR's. We joined in support of printers and other laborers at the U-T, who are in dispute with the U-T for such things as the elimination of health care benefits for workers' children.

Top of Page