Part of the Bay Area News Group

DA: Peterson fires back with mailer

By Lisa Vorderbrueggen
Friday, June 4th, 2010 at 4:55 pm in 2010 election, Contra Costa County, Contra Costa politics.

Contra Costa District Attorney candidate Mark Peterson hopes he will gain last-minute traction with this mailer, which trades on his contention that as a 25-year prosecutor, he is more qualified for the job than his two opponents.

Dan O’Malley was a judge and a deputy district attorney but now works in private practice. Elle Falahat also worked as a prosecutor but has a private practice in Danville.

Most expect this race will end in a run-off, probably between Peterson and O’Malley. In a three-way contest, it may be difficult for one of the candidates to obtain more than 50 percent of the vote and win the seat outright … but it’s not impossible.

Here’s the mailer:

[You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.]

  • http://deleted Reality Check

    This is a slimy hit piece. O’Malley has been a prosecutor for what 14 years a judge for 6 and in private practice for 3 1/2 so suddenly it is his current clients that define him. That’s like saying for the cases that Peterson lost that he was persecuting the innocent!.

    This is really low blow politics. Considering that the big issue in the DA’s office is one of leadership to straighten out that mess, this flyer displays all the reasons why Peterson is unqualified to lead.

  • Drunkenoodlesfriend

    Realitycheck, here is a reality check for you, did Peterson lie. NO. Everything he said was truthful. Do the other candidates defend criminals? Answer-Yes. His information is accurate. I have a feeling you just don’t like it. Too bad for you.

  • Elwood

    Re: #2

    Beyond lame. Pathetic.

  • http://deleted Reality Check

    maybe the heading should start with “innocent people” would then also be truthful?

  • Drunkenoodlesfriend

    What’s pathetic is O’Malley defending criminals and wanting to be DA. So just keep stomping your feet, but in the end, Mark’s mailer was accurate and accounts for the fact his opponents are sleezy defense lawyers. If O’Malley wanted to be DA so bad, why leave the office. My suspicion is that he wasn’t very good, is morally challenged or did it for the money. Plus when I talk to people about him all I ever hear is “He is a really nice guy.”. Well good for him. But we need a fighter in that office.

  • Drunkenoodlesfriend

    Elwood, two words, I’m proud of you!! You have almost made a complete sentence. Keep it up. Not that I would expect much more from an O’Malley supporter. But at least you spelled the words right which is more than can be said for Elle. But if that was the best response you can come up with, please remain inside your parents basement and don’t forget to change the bong water.

  • BJD

    I’m sorry but this mailer is what you can “spin”. Spin is used to deceive voters, not educate them. There is a great book by Brooks Jackson and Kathleen Hall Jamieson called “Un-Spun”… a great read for anyone interested in marketing and politics.

    The bottom line here is Peterson is in trouble, if he wasn’t in trouble he wouldn’t need to “spin” biographies to better suit his case. Too often candidates lower their own negatives with voters trying to lower the negatives of their opponents.

    To finish, comments on spelling and grammar are the last refuge of a scoundrel. They are Ad homimen attacks and show a profound lack of insight and character.

  • Elwood

    Re: #6

    cli·ché
       /kliˈʃeɪ, klɪ-/ Show Spelled[klee-shey, kli-] Show IPA
    –noun
    1.
    a trite, stereotyped expression; a sentence or phrase, usually expressing a popular or common thought or idea, that has lost originality, ingenuity, and impact by long overuse, as sadder but wiser, or strong as an ox.
    2.
    (in art, literature, drama, etc.) a trite or hackneyed plot, character development, use of color, musical expression, etc.
    3.
    anything that has become trite or commonplace through overuse.

  • John W

    A runoff between O’Malley and Peterson would suit me fine. I voted for O’Malley but have since become concerned about his lack of, as the Times put it, “fire in the belly.” We don’t need a laid back administrator. By the same token, Peterson may be too much of an insider, considering the problems in the DA office. I might still vote for O’Malley in a runoff, but I wouldn’t mind the chance for a second looksee.

  • Stan D.

    O’Malley is the heir-apparent, hand-picked candidate who needs this job to fill the shoes of his pop and the stockings of his sis. He’s a nice but lazy guy who planned on stepping right in but along the way he used poor judgment and his campaign never got off the ground. If Peterson does well on Tuesday, it’s because he worked harder and proved to the voters that he deserves to be D.A.