J. Gold apologizes to Paula Deen

The announcement of a Tournament of Roses grand marshal often gets worldwide attention, even if it's not a particularly newsworthy event (person chosen to ride in car and wave at people). Tuesday, the announcement became newsworthy when Pulitzer Prize-winning food critic Jonathan Gold let fly with his unvarnished opinion of Paula Deen, the 2011 marshal, for her embrace of Twinkie-pie cuisine.

Today, Gold, apparently feeling somewhat badly about his reaction, penned an apology letter to Deen, saying he treated her as a brand rather than a person. From the letter:

But our mutual friends say that you are delightful. You clearly love food. And I know that if we were to sit down together, we would probably get along just fine - I suspect that you, like me, could talk for an hour about the finer points of grits, or country ham, or pie crust without beginning to exhaust the topic. I realize that your recipes reflect the way people actually do cook in the South, rather than the way they think they should cook; that they skew toward getting dinner on the table as opposed to an Olympian ideal.

Deen is as charming and good-natured as any Southerner could be. But having grown up myself in a home with Southern-influenced cooking that often relied on the horrible, refined ingredients offered by chain supermarkets, and having since been converted to be more adventurous with ethnic foods and fresher ingredients, I think Gold had a good point that he shouldn't let go of - even if he's sorry about the way he framed it. He'll be on tonight's "Which Way, LA?" to expand on his thoughts. Listen here starting at 7 p.m.

No more free tickets

The California Fair Political Practices Commission has voted to restrict the number of tickets city officials can receive for events at city-owned venues. Although the rules change came in response to complaints in Anaheim, it will affect the city of Pasadena, where the mayor and city council members receive bundles of tickets to the annual Rose Bowl Game and Rose Parade. In the past, the tickets were treated as having no value. Now they will have to be reported at face value and officials will be limited to $420 worth of tickets a year.

What's the value of a gift of no value? *(updated)

Members of the City Council in Pasadena have a long tradition of handing out bundles of Rose Bowl Game and Rose Parade tickets each year to friends, admirers, supporters and other VIPs. Of course, the only way they have those tickets to give away is because the Tournament of Roses, which runs both events, gives each of the local politicos a ticket allotment.

As of now, the California Fair Political Practices Commission considers these tickets to be part of a fund-raising drive for a nonprofit entity, and therefore concludes they have no value under the state's gift restrictions. In other words, a gift of no value.

However, the FPPC's staff counsel is asking the public to comment on whether those tickets should be treated as gifts, and therefore taken at face value - a change that could have implications both at the state level as well as under the city's own Measure B conflict-of-interest rules. It should be noted the FPPC has discussed this before - at least once in 2004 - and seemed unable to come to a resolution.

I have to wonder what prompted the FPPC to take a look at this issue. I'll update if I find out.

From the FPPC press release: Comments may be addressed to Bill Lenkeit, Senior Commission Counsel at the address set forth above, by e-mail at blenkeit@fppc.ca.gov. or by telephone at (916) 327-2020.

*A Pasadena councilman says I've misremembered the way the system works regarding tickets for the Rose Bowl Game. Each council member receives two free tickets, which would be affected by a rule change. However, the 90 or so tickets each member gets from the Tournament to allocate to constituents are paid for by the recipient. The cache of parade tickets, however, are given to council members to give away free. Each one of those caches is worth thousands of dollars and also would be covered by a rule change.

Rounds one & two: police

According to Pasadena Star-News reporter Todd Ruiz, a heavy police presence thwarted an attempt by protesters to disrupt the 119th Rose Parade. The Beijing Olympic float, a symbol to some of China's effort to flower over its terrible human rights' record, was the target.

Pasadena police, FBI agents and the Secret Service were reportedly lining the route to protect the sanctity of family fun.

Protesters have yet to give up, however. They sent out a press release earlier this morning stating their intent to sue the city for refusing to issue them a permit to hold a pre-parade protest rally.

Update: The Chinese float, named One World One Dream, won the Theme Award Trophy. The theme for this year's parade was the pithy Passport to the World's Celebrations.

The float from Taiwan also won an award.

Is the Rose Parade more fun than the First Amendment?

Falun Gong practitioners and assorted human rights activists plan to protest tomorrow's Rose Parade over the inclusion of a Chinese-themed float celebrating the 2008 Olympic Games in Beijing.

They don't like that China sometimes tortures and kills its dissidents.

Pasadena Mayor Bill Bogaard claims protesters have unfairly singled out the float (and him) for their ire given the complex nature of international relations.

The float, which shows a cuddlier, cuter side of China, will be seen on television sets around the globe - including TVs in China, thanks to recent deals made by parade organizers.

But don't worry, Pasadena Police Chief Bernard Melekian promises politics won't spoil the fun.

“There are a lot of groups who think that this is their moment to get on television. That's simply not going to happen," he told the San Diego Union-Tribune. "I hate to see something that is a fun, family event that's turning 119 years old go this way. It was never intended to be political theater. But there are people who seem to want to turn it into that.”

Better not let the White Coats catch you exercising your conscience.

Here's what Melekian told the Pasadena Star-News earlier this month: "The only people who have First Amendment rights along the route are the Tournament of Roses."

I guess habeas corpus must be Latin for hibiscus.

But can we really blame Bogaard and Melekian? They are caught up defending a tradition that's built on illusion. The Rose Parade started out as pure boosterism - a rolling advertisement for bountiful Southern California draped in flowers and punctuated by marching bands. It hasn't changed much.

Indeed, I think it's a perfect vehicle for a totalitarian government looking to put its best face forward - nevermind the torture, look at these cute characters!

And it's also ripe for political theater.

Something for everyone.