Benton-Rivers: Bad juju.

“I will stand my ground against anyone who attempts to bully, intimidate or threaten me.” Sen. Ann Rivers (R - LaCenter)

"Something's happenin' here... what it is, ain't exactly clear." From the song "For what it's worth" - Buffalo Springfield

I have had a few discussions since this story broke with friends and colleagues, and the response has been universal:

What the hell was Benton thinking?

This is a war that Don cannot win. If he had asked me, here's what I would have told him.

1. To take this, what I would call the "nuclear option," is to damage the MCC.

2. When you were chair of the state GOP, one of the things that drove you to distraction was the efforts of executive board members to air internal controversies in the media.

3. The optics simply don't play.

4. You do not do well as "victim."

5. This presentation holds you as blameless, and that simply does not pass the straight-face test.

6. What do you hope to accomplish? What do you want out of this? Why didn't you think this through?

Ann Rivers is a rising political star. She is highly thought of by most; for example, although she shares many (most) political views with Benton, Brancaccio, who hates the air Benton breathes, tells us that Rivers is "going places."

Benton, on the other hand, is portrayed as a partisan hack with high negatives. He's ran (and lost) elections for Congress, county assessor and US Senate.

Ann's star is on the ascent. Don's?

Not so much.

Among other things, politics is the art of optics. How things look make a huge impact on people, as much as past history and public perception.

When I look through the Benton complaint and I see verbiage like this:

“At one point during her uncontrollable tirade, I was actually afraid that she may even physically strike me,” Benton wrote to Hunter Goodman, secretary of the Senate. “It was a very uncomfortable feeling. I have been on the receiving end of many heated comments over the years, but I have never before felt the threat of physical violence.”

....I wince at the foolishness of such an observation.

No one will believe this. No one. So, why use it?

You outweigh this woman by over 100 pounds and you fear her?

You believe that she would physically attack you in public?

No one will believe that.

In making this complaint public, I believe that those reading it will be absolutely mystified.

What did Don hope to accomplish?

There will be no punitive measures taken against Ann, no one else has complained about her conduct and, in fact, she is almost universally well thought of. So why is this happening?

Clearly, there is a deep-seated motivation that is behind all this. Over the last 18 years, is it out of the realm of possibility that Don has used this same kind of language to describe others in the senate?

There is a seething anger and rage far beyond anything alleged against Ann expressed in this complaint.

Don holds himself blameless in all of this. Will the people believe he's an innocent bystander that Ann perhaps chose at random in a drive-by kind of way to pick on?

And attacking the leadership that he's a part of. Why would he do that? Why now?

How does any of this move the MCC ball forward? How does this help the people of this state or of Don's district? How much of a distraction has this been from the job at hand for him? How much of an anchor has this been around Benton's neck, sucking the energy out of him that otherwise could have been best used to serve the people? Why on earth would anyone buy into Benton's claim that “...this is about the honor and respect of the institution.... I think this will help the institution. That’s the motivation here.”

The institution doesn't have a problem with Ann Rivers, Don. You do. And this smacks of retaliation. It smacks of your rage. It smacks of pay-back. And you cannot hide behind "the institution" as a justification for screwing this up so badly.

One of the side effects of all of this will be to provide grist for Benton's enemies who will now multiply. The newspaper, which looks for reasons to attack Benton and his positions now have fresh fuel for that fire. Instead of addressing the issues, like the final death of the CRC, Benton's enemies will now revel in the agony of yet another public GOP fight to the detriment of the over-all goal.

Crunch time is here, and now we have this unnecessary distraction to contend with that will, in fact, result in nothing that Benton wants while likely having an over-all detrimental impact to him personally and politically.

In my office, literally, is a 4 X 6 whiteboard on the wall. I frequently "whiteboard" these types of things as both a mental and written exercise. As I “white board” this particular issue, I ask myself: what is the goal here?

1. The first and most obvious is to damage Ann Rivers both personally and politically.

The sky was the limit for Ann's political future yesterday before this broke in the press from a press conference.

And it still is today as it will be tomorrow and so on. Ann is still standing, and will be for years to come.

2. Or, it really is for the "honor and respect of the institution."

What makes that problematic is over the past 18 years when has that been a priority for Don?

What has he done to attack other members of his own caucus like this publicly?

How does airing this complaint and referring to the leadership of your own caucus as "amoral cowards" accomplish that?

Firing this cannon at a gnat. To what end?

I expect the howl to rise to a cacophony now: this situation concerning the Benton hiring has died down considerably only to likely start back up today and increase over the weekend. Once again, Madore and Mielke are likely to get hammered because of the Benton hiring.

Don has done some really great things for us: from fighting that idiotic HOV lane years ago to fighting the CRC and a great many other things that have benefited this community.

But he faces a self-inflicted stigma here: he looks like he's trying to beat up a woman using the system to do it by firing off what will appear to many as outrageous, laughable allegations replete with over the top characterizations that are simply not true.

The public likely can't figure out what he's trying to accomplish outside of an unnecessary effort to harm a colleague, and to do so without any particular concern for what that will do to his caucus in Olympia.

Even if it is for "the institution," it comes across as petty and vindictive. It comes across, not "for the institution," but instead, as if it's "for Don," the institution be damned.

A quick check indicates that I have written about 230 blog posts defending Don Benton in some way or another. I wish none of this had happened. But I cannot defend this action on Benton's part or how he went about it.

And perception... is the reality.

Bad optics. Bad politics.... bad juju.

(Full Disclosure: I have known and worked with/for Don Benton for 18 years and have known and occasionally worked with Ann Rivers for 9 years.  Sen. Benton did not discuss taking this action with me before he pulled the trigger.)