City Government
Popkey Caves to Swindell
October 30, 2005 
Perhaps taking a hint from previous Statesmen writers who fueled the fires of the religious right, columnist Dan Popkey offered an apology to city council candidate Brandi Swindell for perviously printed remarks she labeled as sexist.
In his Sunday column, Popkey acknowledged that he knew better and shouldn’t have said things about Brandi’s good looks. He had previously declined to apologize during a show on KIDO am 580 radio. The last Statesman guy to write things (in Thrive!) about Brandi’s looks is no longer working at the state’s largest paper.
Dan is a better man for admitting his mistake even though he probably still won’t vote for Ms. Swindell.
For our part, we never noticed her looks. All we saw was a candidate for city council. Comes from our military training. We never even noticed women in uniforms with gold oak leaves–we grunts saw only officers and dutifully saluted!
It was great material and fun for the GUARDIAN, prompting the most comments we ever had on a single story. See Brandi Gets Boost?
To insure more advertising-free Boise Guardian news, please consider financial support.
Comments & Discussion
Comments are closed for this post.
Oct 30, 2005, 10:41 am
His response could/should have been that as long as SHE insists on USING her looks (i.e. glam shots for public relations)then her looks are fair game. You can’t exploit your own strengths or perceived strengths and then expect to not have others comment upon them.
Oct 30, 2005, 7:23 pm
First time I read his column I thought nothing of his shots at Brandi and instead focused on his point about the Republicans supporting her candidacy (I guess because having all Congressional, 6 of 7 statewide and 75 percent of the legislature seats is not enough). Read it again a few days later and I had to flag Popkey fifteen yards for unnecessary roughness. He could have simply said she can point to no education, work or civic experience that prepares her for City Council.
I have no problem with her photos on the website. In fact, I like them because they depart from the traditional, largely fradulant photos one encounters in campaign propaganda that usually show a candidate in a dark business suit with a pen in hand, serious look on the face, and playing like they are reading a report.
Oct 30, 2005, 7:26 pm
Actually, there was a pretty good Letter to the Editor on this from David Washburn:
Brandi Swindell, shame on you. How dare you be good-looking! Don’t you know that if you want to run for City Council, you have to pull out all your teeth but one, grow a wart on your nose, either cultivate or paint ugly pimples all over your face, let your hair turn into a rat’s nest, gain at least a hundred pounds, and — oh, wait, that’s only if you’re conservative. As long as you toe Dan Popkey’s line, you can look however you want to. Now I’m all confused…
Oct 31, 2005, 8:04 am
The only thing I can say is that if you are going to run with the pigs expect to get dirty. Poor Brandi gleefully takes GOP cash and when Popkey takes a couple of shots at her she squeals “not fair”. Given the state of politics today no one should be surprised. While both parties are guilty of mudslinging, the GOP has taken it to unbelievable levels in the last 5 years. This time the shoe was on the other foot and they didn’t like it much. Do you think they will learn anything from the experience?
Oct 31, 2005, 9:44 am
Greetings from IF.
Popkey needed to spin rather than recant, and everyone else needs to join in. Politicization of city office, single-issue lameness, lack of REAL experience, lack of accomplishments, and trying to gloss over it with glamour photos ( BTW, Osprey: how can you say that her photos aren’t ‘largely fraudulent’… the photos came after careful makeup and hair work… they’re glamour shots, pure and simple).
It’s a simple rule: superficial twits or single-issue nimrods get ignored. It sends a simple message: only serious candidates need apply.
Oct 31, 2005, 10:44 am
Personal attacks have no place in elections , period. You haven’t seen any such attacks on Maryanne Jordan.
As far as the supposed non-partisan office bit, it never has been. How about the fact that Maryanne Jordan’s campaign manager is a Democrat, works for the Democratic Party, and took a leave of absence from her position, to run Jordan’s campaign. And Democratic legislator LeFavour apparently sent out an urgent e-mail to her constituents urging them to work for Jordan’s campaign and vote against Swindell. There is a classic double standard.
If everyone would stick to the issues such as the present city council raised taxes & fees 56 times, and their unwillingness to listen to citizens on issues such as forced annexation & infill, and not letting the people vote on issues involving new taxes, we’d all benefit. But Maryanne Jordan is part of the status quo , so maybe we need to inject new blood into this city. We really don’t care what the person looks like!
Oct 31, 2005, 4:31 pm
Kate makes an important point. Where has Popkey been, if he’s expressing outrage that Brandi’s being managed by the GOP? It’s the exception when a local-office candidate doesn’t have obvious ties to one or the other of the major parties. To call the elections “non partisan” is really quite amusing. Non partisan – nudge, nudge, wink, wink.
Criminy! Mayor Bieter was a Democratic legislator before he changed hats. Most of the council quack like Democrats. (I’m not sure about Bisterfeldt… I’m guessing he’s backed by the Bull Moose Party!)
My main issues with “Brandi”:
– she has a well-publicized personal agenda that seems pretty much totally unrelated to Boise’s current issues.
– she has a well-crafted “image” – not only the grooming, but the very generalized albeit well-rehearsed catch-phrases that are her “platform.”
– she claims to be a consensus-builder, but all evidence suggests otherwise.
– what’s with the name “Brandi”? I’ve read that it isn’t her given name… why would she choose it? (Sounds like a barmaid or a “working girl,” if ya know what I mean.)
When does the “Miss Boise Scholarship Pageant” get underway again?
One other question… where’s perennial candidate “Harley Brown” this time around? I’ve always fancied a scenario where Councilmen Bisterfeldt and Harley take their disagreements out to the parking lot, to settle ’em like men!
(-;