Comments on: CD10: Tauscher’s endorsement questioned

By: EdiBirsan

EdiBirsan — Mon, 20 Jul 2009 23:54:32 +0000

Arne… the Hatch Act would not apply to a person who was not a hired federal employee at the time of the activity. Unless you want to argue that elected officials may not engage in political activity..,that would be very funny and I would love to see someone write those arrest warrants.

By: Arne Simonsen

Arne Simonsen — Mon, 20 Jul 2009 21:52:44 +0000

It not only violates State Department rules, it violates The Hatch Act which precludes any federal employee from engaging in political activity, particularly endorsements.

By: John W

John W — Mon, 20 Jul 2009 19:50:03 +0000

Ditto to EdiBirsan comment. I have no opinion on the CD 10 race. Would love to see a fresh face. But it is absurd to say either that Tauscher should not have endorsed (before she joined State) or that DeSaulnier should no longer circulate campaign material that includes her pre-State endorsement.

By: Mike F.

Mike F. — Mon, 20 Jul 2009 18:03:00 +0000

I’m not in the “connected” or a part of any “machine.” This pre-endorsement did stink. Also, I hate to hear about the Demo. “machine” of Central Contra Costa in the comments, especially about anyone getting the pre-approved “nod” before running. I’m tired of the who’s who always looking to jump into the next goverment seat, especially when they have hardly done any time or anything in their current seat – it stinks. We need someone that is an outsider with refreshing ideas that doesn’t owe the “machine.” Geez, I thought the stink was from the refineries, but I guess its all those that just set their sights on the next power seat in Contra Costa. The hot air they’ve been putting out just stinks.

By: Renegade Republican

Renegade Republican — Sun, 19 Jul 2009 14:25:35 +0000

William Shakespeare had it right in King Henry VI

‘The first thing we do, let’s kill all the lawyers.’

Now I am not endorcing killing anyone but the fact is

they sure waste a lot of people’s time!

By: EdiBirsan

EdiBirsan — Sun, 19 Jul 2009 04:12:09 +0000

The question before us was whether DeSaulnier should not use the FACT that Tauscher endorsed him before she was appointed to the State Department or even officially interviewed for the job. Combined with this is the very odd assertion Tauscher should insist that this matter of history should be suppressed. This is a laughable position for anyone of any profession to take. All the rest of the bluster is a totally different subject matter….and a rather very ‘subjective’ matter at that, which has nothing to do with the subject at hand…. seriously (break for laughter).

By: Elwood

Elwood — Sun, 19 Jul 2009 03:17:31 +0000

Michael M. Cohen’s post tells it like it is.

By: Michael M. Cohen

Michael M. Cohen — Sat, 18 Jul 2009 21:14:14 +0000

Edi, please at least give Bezis the respect that he deserves as a lawyer.

Read his first page – he is complaining about DeSaulnier continuing to distribute the literature in question, not “erasing the timeline” or some such metaphorical wackiness.

The law’s the law. You’re a lawyer? Then make a legalistic argument that will challenge Bezis’ contentions on its merits.

You think Katie Merrill’s comment is hilarious? Here’s one for you, how about looking up who she is and how objective she is to this issue. “DeSaulnier camp” my foot….What’s truly hilarious is how slickly this coronation is being presented as authentically democratic.

Speaking to the OTHER former Tauscher staffer’s assertion, that Garamendi was supposedly seeking Tauscher’s endorsement – when was that, before he even hinted at entering the race? Really?

I’m unclear how Tucker invoking a spurious “sour grapes” claim and simultaneously revising the timeline is in any way less hilarious than Bezis’ claim…do you swallow PR and say “thank you”, but instantly dismiss a legal brief?

Let’s be honest. Everyone knows why George Miller, Tom Torlakson, and Ellen Tauscher immediately endorsed Mark DeSaulnier. It was to scare off Joan Buchanan from running for Congress, by quickly gathering around a single candidate, well before Garamendi ever publicly expressed any interest in this seat.

There’s an entrenched Democratic machine in central Contra Costa. Outsiders to that machine, no matter how qualified, are made to feel unwelcome, no matter their stances on issues or their loyalty to the party-at-large. Buchanan and Garamendi are not welcome to this contest, and everyday voters in central Contra Costa and the 3 other counties in the 10th District are out of the loop on the machine’s inner workings. The powers-that-be of the local Democratic machine long ago decided who gets the nod – the fellow that was appointed by Pete Wilson, the recent contributor to Republican campaigns, namely, DeSaulnier.

DeSaulnier decided that he couldn’t credibly run for office here in central Contra Costa registered as a Republican. He could get appointed by a Republican Governor, sure, but not elected. So he changed his party registration in 2002. I don’t know who’s been more naive in this whole affair – you or other DeSaulnier supporters? Keep an eye next on the gullible cogs in the local machine that will soon be asked to help send Proposition 8 backer Susan Bonilla to Sacramento..

Or is the machine actually planning on sending her to DC? Why does her website title (look at the top of your browser window) say “Susan Bonilla for Congress 2010″ – does she know something about George Miller’s future plans that the public isn’t allowed to know? Will DeSaulnier be elected to Congress to serve by his “good friend’s” side, only to see Miller retire shortly after? There goes DeSaulnier’s oft-cited hotline to Speaker Pelosi…

How cynical is DeSaulnier himself? Is he claiming that he has this advantage over his Congressional opponents, this tight relationship with George Miller, when it’s apparently widely known within the central Contra Costa political machine that Miller is set to retire?

Maybe that’s too speculative. However, as artifacts that can be found on Bonilla’s website indicate, she must have or has had intentions of succeeding George Miller. She is now apparently slated to inherit Tom Torlakson’s Assembly seat, which DeSaulnier held until this year but gave up in the musical chairs game that ensures political longevity. The music continues, but unfortunately, only an anointed few are allowed to play. And this is democratic?

By: David Peterson

David Peterson — Sat, 18 Jul 2009 18:29:50 +0000

Frankly, I think the Lt. Governor missed an opportunity.
If he had taken a page from the http://www.SunlightFoundation.com book, and embraced Open-Government & Transparency, he may have come across a Citizen Oversight & Accountability report such as this one:
http://ow.ly/hB7q

If Ellen’s scores only 5 out of 14 = 37% for Legislative-effort, according to her own constituents, the question the Lt. should ask is: “Does the endorsement mean we will get more of the same?”

With the poor report card no Town halls, I’d expect Senator DeSaulnier to start singing slogan #3 from the Obama campaign, “Time for Change”, http://ow.ly/hB77 .

P.S. Never Trust a Political Poll that fails to include your opinion! This one above is open 24/7-365

Lt. & all come see the future of Democracy. http://ow.ly/hB8k

By: John W

John W — Fri, 17 Jul 2009 18:18:37 +0000

EdBirsan nailed it. The “Seriously?” response was classic. I couldn’t stop laughing when I first saw it.