|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
Three candidates seeking nomination to the newly-created 15th Congressional District that covers Pleasanton are walking precinct and holding voter meetings in the coming week as the California primary on Tuesday, June 5 nears.
Wednesday, Congressman Pete Stark, a Democrat who is now serving in the 13th Congressional District that is being realigned, met with supporters at a reception hosted by Pleasanton Mayor Jennifer Hosterman. He said his experience and achievements in serving this region qualifies him for renomination on June 5 and election on Nov. 6.
In the primary, he faces challengers Eric Swalwell, also a Democrat and a Dublin City Councilman and Alameda County prosecutor, and Conservative Independent Chris Pareja. The top two vote-getters will be on the General Election ballot in November
If the residence of Pleasanton know whats good for them they will not support Rep. Stark for re-election.
He doesn’t live here, he doesn’t have a clue what is happening in our area and he has no idea how to play well with others.
Time for new representation with somebody that has ties to the community and a fresh pair of eyes.
I don’t care whether he advances the Democratic Party agenda or not. This is a question of whether residence of P-Town have a representative with a new pair of eyes.
You mean he actually flew into CA…did he stay overnight?
Note that Pete Stark is unwilling to participate in any debates with the other candidates. He has the gall to say that his opponent was provided a platform to attack him on personal issues at the League of Women Voters debate and that is why he will not participate in further debates.
Just one more example of Pete Stark simply not telling the truth. In fact, he was the one that falsely accused his opponent of taking “hundreds of thousands of dollars” in bribes; a statement that he was forced to apologize for under the threat of a slander lawsuit. He also accused his opponent of having a spotty voting record, again a flat out lie that he was forced, again, to apologize for. At the conclusion of the debate, he lashed out at his opponent with a profanity laced sentence reportedly calling his opponent a “f____ crook”.
Even the Chronicle has had enough of him saying “Stark’s disregard for the truth, not to mention basic decency, has been an embarrassing display in Campaign 2012.”
Perhaps the real reason for him turning down invites for public debates sponsored by such organizations as the Livermore Valley Chamber of Commerce (a non-partisan group), and the Asian Pacific Islander Public Affairs Association (another non-partisan group) is that he really has nothing truthful to offer and is worried that he will continue to show his arrogance and dishonesty in front of an audience.
It is about who can actually do SOMETHING for this district… A new pair of eyes and even ears will do nothing if that person can’t connect with others and form some sort of coalition. Congress is not a solitary sport as some would have you believe. Stark lives in the district and has a home near the Capitol as most Congressmembers do. . .The arrogance of thinking that a campaign based on lies and no substance will translate into something for this area is misguided. Stark does have ties to the rest of the district and his opponent does not. In the last ten years Stark has represented a small part of Pleasanton off Foothill and previous to that more of Pleasanton. He is familar with this region and has helped provide federal funding for I680 and I580, not to mention BART. The question isn’t who you like best but who can deliver!
Deliver what, exactly? Over time relationships with other power players grow and cronyism sets in. Our system lets the people clear the slate, so to speak, to break up such relationships when they no longer serve the interests of the people. What one needs to question isn’t who can deliver, but whether the interests of the people are still being served.
Stark does not live in the district. He has been a resident of Maryland for years. He rents a room at an in-laws home as his voting place of resident. He does not deliver – He does nothing and knows nothing about this area. He has been passed over in the Legislature because of his inability to work with others. He is looking for another rubber stamp in this election and hopefully the residents will not be drinking his koolaid! Wake Up!
If you do not know the facts or are willing to do the homework then don’t comment.
He has consistently voted in support of Obama’s policies. In my view, that counts as delivering. Bad eyes? Doesn’t bother me. Insults competitors? Couldn’t care less. Lives in/around DC like every single house member does? What’s the big deal? Cronyism and clearing the slate as stated by our lady witchhunter? Please.
Hey Ronnie,
I wholeheartedly agree with you that Stark has “delivered” consistent with Obama. That equates to a monumental DISASTER for America.
The anti-American, anti-freedom, anti-free market marxist needs to be retired asap.
Shhhhhhh!!! As an Obama supporter, we’re not supposed to let the cat out of the bag. We are all actually supporters of communist totalitarian tyranny and want everyone sharing everyone else’s underwear and toothpaste as a matter of enforcing equality upon all. Obama is our guy because he’s the most radical leftist president in the history of the Earth.
P’town voters should pay attention to which of our local elected are pictured standing with Stark. We don’t need any of Stark’s tax and spend policies here in Pleasanton!
Annonymous,
Regarding your comment on who can deliver, I would be interested on your take on the fact that his own party would not support him to become the next chairman of the Ways and Means Committee, although following the House Democrats’ seniority system put him in line to chair the powerful panel with authority over tax and trade issues. But rank-and-file Democrats on the committee rebelled because Stark, has a history of intemperate remarks.
Is this the type of delivering you want?
How anyone can support Pete Stark is beyond me.
Ronnie, he has never represented all of Pleasanton. I can’t think of anything he’s ‘done for anybody LATELY’. Which is why Dem leadership doesn’t let him lead anything,
I’d like to see the media stop indicating that politicians “serve” their constituents. Today’s politicians, regardless of political affiliation, are being served by the public. The overwhelming majority of Congress and all of our modern day Presidents are by definition part of the 1%. Many of them, like Pete Stark, accrued their personal wealth through “public service.”
Politicians are laughing all the way to the bank as voters keep sending back the same people who serve only themselves and their special interest groups. The state and the country are in a mess and ultimately it’s the fault of the voters for re-electing incumbents.
The same arguments that people are making today to keep Pete Stark in office will be around in 2 more years.
What then? Do we let those who want to “honor” his history continue the same line of thought as long as Pete himself deems it OK to continue?
Clearly even supporters of the man can see he isn’t the leader we put in place in 1972.
When interviewed by the SF Chronicle and the Contra Costa Times he was asked what legislation he had introduced in the past 10 years and he couldn’t come up with anything.
There comes a point when we don’t “owe” Pete the seat just because he wants to hold it.
When he finally leaves office, in January or in a few years, is there anyone naive enough to think he will return to live in “his” district. Please… Neither he nor his family consider themselves to be residents of this district.
His own son, upon whose research Pete was relying recently, says in his blog, that he is a Marylander. Pete’s wife has her entire career in Washington.
Short and simple, Pete and his family don’t live here anymore, he only holds the seat because of those who say we should honor his history.
When Pete was 40 he said his opponent was out of touch, distant and tired. Showed pictures of the then 80 year old incumbent.
Now the situation is nearly identical except is the 80 year old tired incumbent.
It is time for him to retire. It isn’t his seat, its our seat.
I personally believe that in order to mitigate cronyism in the political class we should vote in candidates whose cronyism is restricted to the capitalist owning class. I have many good friends on Wall Street, for example, as well as NFL and NASCAR owners, who’d make perfectly good representatives for your district. Of course, as far as president goes, I’ve always thought a successful businessman would be the ideal candidate. And since Bernie Madoff is in prison and Donald Trump has withdrawn, I guess maybe some other successful businessman might do. Somebody who made a lot of money with Bain might be a pretty good pick.
Creaola,
Excellent posting! To the point and accurate.
Our mayor supports Stark….
That tells me a lot
God help us all
pete stark should be defeated. unfortunately, the only difference between stark and stalwell is their age. they have the same socialist/confused views and there will be no difference in congressional votes cast.
Of course our mayor supports him. She’s part of the status quo Dem machine.
And the mayoral candidate Cheryl Cook-Kallio was in attendance at Stark’s event with Hosterman. Just sayin’.
I’m a lifelong Democrat. I’ll tell you exactly why I’m NOT going to vote for Pete Stark. Because of comments exactly like the one I saw on another site. It put forth exactly what I am sick of.
—————————————————————-
“Congressman Pete Stark is the choice of the people & the choice of the Democratic Party,that’s good enough for me,case closed. No rank & file Democrat would defy the party leadership & vote for this aspiring interloper ! There are plenty of better qualified & more deserving potential candidates to succeed Pete when he’s ready to relinquish his office & Eric Swalwell has a lot of audacity if he thinks he can cut into the front of the line !!!
—————————————————————–
The parts I love.
1. “Pete Stark is the choice of the Democratic Party and that’s good enough for me”
2. ” No rank & file Democrat would defy the party leadership ”
3. ” There are plenty of better qualified & more deserving potential candidates to succeed Pete when he’s ready to relinquish his office.
4. ” Eric Swalwell has a lot of audacity if he thinks he can cut into the front of the line”
So there you have it as the “party leadership” would say it.
“no rank and file Democrat would DEFY the party LEADERSHIP”
“when he’s (Pete’s) ready to RELINQUISH HIS OFFICE”
“Swalwell thinks he can CUT IN LINE”
OK all you fellow lifelong Democrats, like myself, get with the plan, salute your party leaders and don’t you ever vote for a candidate they don’t give approval to.
Above all, it’s PETE’s OFFICE, not ours.
Tell you what, after 40 years, the party leaders can shove it!
The reason Stark won’t debate is his failed appearance before the San Fransisco Chronicle editorial board. He knows that his age is catching up with him, and any more gaffes will force the Chronicle to call him out, if they aren’t already willing to do so.
Even the Chronicle has had enough of him saying “Stark’s disregard for the truth, not to mention basic decency, has been an embarrassing display in Campaign 2012.”
San Ramon Observer,
Do you have plans to interview Pete Stark also, or did I miss it? Would be interested if you do request an interview with Pete Stark, if he would accept! His record so far has been dismal, both on honesty and accomplishments.
San Ramon Observer
Thank you for your response. I’m not surprised by Pete Stark’s lack of courtesy in not responding, however am impressed with your polite way in handling his non response!
To San Ramon Observer,
I echo Dave’s response to you.
If you really want Pete Stark to give you his time, you’ve got to convince him that you are on the same side as the marxist SEIU and that you want BIG GOVT to get even BIGGER, thus usurping more freedom and human rights from the lowly citizens.
Yes, what a heck of an astute community of responders we have here. Stark is a Commie Marxist who supports union labor, which is the same thing as supporting a Stalinist State. We need to get rid of the commie tyrant Stark, we need to get rid of all union supporting Democrats who actually are all Communists, and I will work toward that end, but first I shall get rid of Planned Parenthood. (Hah! I bet this Stark creep SUPPORTS Planned Parenthood and all the immoral cancer pre-testing it does for women. Off with his head!)
wh0cd812302 [url=http://viagraprice2017.com/]cost viagra[/url]
Creaola,
Did you consider that the comment in the other blog was intended to be sarcastic and not written by a Democrat?
For those who wonder why Jennifer Hosterman invited Stark to Pleasanton, the Pleasanton Weekly reported that she’s planning to run for the 15th District when Stark retires after this term. It sounds like she’s hoping to be anointed heir apparent, especially if she has been told (by Stark or someone else in the know), that this is his last campaign.
For those who want a choice in the primary, Stark is facing two opponents — Democrat Eric Swalwell and Decline to State Chris Pareja. I interviewed Swalwell on my San Ramon Observer Blogtalkradio program last week. There’s an annoying hum in the background, but Swalwell presented his case well. You can listen to the archived version at http://www.blogtalkradio.com/san-ramon-observer/2012/05/23/can-eric-swalwell-unseat-pete-stark
I shall be interviewing Chris Pareja tomorrow morning at 11:30 am. This show will also be recorded for later playback at http://www.blogtalkradio.com/san-ramon-observer/2012/05/30/can-chris-pareja-unseat-pete-stark .
You can read about Mr. Pareja in this week’s San Ramon Observer blog at http://www.sanramonexpress.com/square/index.php?i=3&d=&t=1172
If you have questions for any of my upcoming guests, especially Mr. Pareja, please post them in a reply to my blog on the San Ramon Express.
Roz Rogoff
San Ramon Observer
San Ramon Express and Blogtalkradio
Dave,
When I scheduled the interview with Eric Swalwell I invited both Rep. Stark and candidate Pareja to listen and phone in questions or schedule their own interview. I did not hear from Stark, but Mr. Pareja emailed me a thank you and asked to be interviewed; so I scheduled his interview for this week.
It is possible that my email to Rep. Stark was intercepted by one of his campaign workers. I probably should have phoned, but I didn’t leave enough time before the primary to interview all three. If Stark is in the top two finishers, I shall extend another opportunity to him to be interviewed before the November election.
If he is bumped by Swalwell and Pareja, I would ask Stark if he wants to be interviewed on why he lost and which of the two candidates he supports. I’m small potatoes, so I doubt he would bother answering me, but who knows.
Roz