Fremont Council Endorsements
By Matt Artz
Friday, September 5th, 2008 at 6:34 pm in City Council Election, Fremont.
On Saturday the Tri-City Democratic Forum will hold candidate interviews and make recommendations.
One howling fellow on this blog says they always go with the Planning Commissioner looking to make a leap, but my guess is this year they’ll pass over Planning Commissioner Sue Chan and go with Ohlone College Trustee Trisha Tahmasbi, who is also Deputy Chief of Staff for Assembly Majority Leader Alberto Torrico. My prediction is Tahmasbi and Wieckowski get the nod for Council.
The duo appear to also have the endorsement of the Alameda County Democratic Central Committee — and with it the likely endorsements of council members Bill Harrison and Anu Natarajan. The official endorsement from the committee could come as soon as 10 a.m. tommorrow, I’m told.
[You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.]
September 5th, 2008 at 8:28 pm
The Alameda County Democratic Central Committee is busy making endorsements and helping fellow Democrats get into office, while the Alameda County Republican Central Committee Chairman is busy suing Republican volunteers, in an effort to keep regular people from participating in the local political process. Looks like 2008 might be a repeat of 2006!
http://www.ConstitutionalRepublicans.org
From what I’ve witnessed, Wieckowski, is quick to let his personal feelings get in the way of the Constitutional principals that make this Country great and that he’s also sworn to protect and defend. His narrow-minded, yet outspoken position regarding the Minutemen marching in the Fremont 4th of July Parade was enough to leave a sour taste in my mouth.
As far as Ms. Tahmasbi goes, I don’t know too much about her, but her boss (Alberto Torrico) sure has made it clear that his answer to solve all problems is to raise our taxes. For all we know, Trisha, has been corrupted by Torrico’s philosophies. ((No harm intended Trisha))
It is good to see that the people of Fremont have so many choices though. When was the last time Fremont had over 10 candidates running for City-Council?
September 6th, 2008 at 12:13 am
Wow, Walter, you sling mud almost as well as Palin and McCain’s other cronies. Nixon would be proud of how you carry on his Republican legacy of division and anger.
September 6th, 2008 at 12:50 am
Weicowsku is Torricos law partner. trisha works for torrico and was weicowskis campaogn manager. The same torrico gang is a rotating set of characters installing puppets and establishment candidates. Hopefully Fremont residents are smarter than Harrison and Anu who endorse to further their own political careers. In the year of change we need to say no to the torrico gang of three
September 6th, 2008 at 8:40 am
Walter, a
As a fellow constitutional republican I couldn’t agree with you more!!
The Democrat Central Committee is on top of their game! And, it shows what a central committee is capable of doing.
While the county GOP has given no official endorsement to Steve Cho, there is indeed unofficial support for Cho as he is “de facto” networked into the local party establishment and recieves their support both financially and with some volunteer time. For example, two incumbant GOP CC members worked very aggressively to ensure the Minutemen did not run a candidate against Cho. Diffusing a Minuteman attack was actually a great benefit for Cho and probably saved his entire campaign since it resulted in the MM withdrawing their ballot statement.
That being said, I would not expect any similar endorsements coming from the county GOP. Nor do I expect any endorsements or support in anyway from local Republican leadership for my city council campaign. If anything, I expect either utter silence or direct opposition. As a first time candidate, the lack of support is a major handicap, but that’s the reality we live in. Minutemen just need to develop a strategy to circumvent it. This means we have to become a more and more independent power.
Anyway, for those curious about my campaign and related issues, see here:
http://www.charles4council.com
the website is obviously still in progress, and there are some spelling errors, etc., but the idea is there. The election goes beyond me, and hope to jumpstart a larger campaign for gradual disincorporation of Fremont, called Township Government.
I hope to have everything sown together in another week or week and a half. Around that time I will begin to respond to speaking engagements or other requests if and when they come down the pike. I’ve postponed a number of inquiries because I feel the website, PAC, and brochures need to first be finished. Almost there.
Meanwhile, Jon, it does appear “we are attacking everyone” simply because both Demos and Republicans are in bed with one another over free trade, subsidized business, and globalization. These national issues ‘trickle down’ to the local level, manifesting themselves as city oridnance (e.g., protected person clauses) and in various commissions (e.g., sister cities), as you well know… This is just one side of economic restructuring, not to mention the trail of government debt which is left behind…
sincerely,
charles bartlett
Minuteman, Constitutional Repulican & city council candidate
September 6th, 2008 at 11:09 am
Jon Simon, I only sling mud at elected community leaders that have dirt on their hands!
I personally take offense to Torrico’s all out attack on my personal finances. I can’t afford it! Like me, many are already struggling out there. Torrico is one of the well-known, big named Democrats that is pushing to balance our budget with numerous tax increases across the board!
As far as Wieckowski goes, I don’t respect any elected representative who says that he’d “boo” the Minutemen, because they wanted to march in the Fremont 4th of July Parade. I can respect that Mr. Wieckowski may have a different point of view, than that of the Minutemen and their want to secure America’s borders, but as an “elected leader,” Mr. Wieckowski should let the Constitution widen his narrow-mind or at least, be his guide. Of course, “the people” are welcome to voice their concerns or support by “booing” or “cheering,” however, as a community leader, Mr. Wieckowski, should be a bit more reserved regarding the diverse view-points of the public.
Jon Simon says that I carry on the Republican legacy of division and anger. Well, between Torrico’s, “tax-everybody-even-more” plan and Wieckowski’s, “unconstitutionalism,” I guess I am a little angry and for that matter… divided! Call it, “right and left”… Call it, “right or wrong”… Most of the time “We The People” loose.
Now, Jon, even you and I can agree on that!
((I did try to be civil. I even wrote, “No Harm Intended Trisha”))
September 6th, 2008 at 1:53 pm
The local political machine is endorsing two of their own. It should not be a surprise. The Argus, 2nd wing of the political machine will endorse Bob Wieckowski and Trisha soon. If you do not want the status-quo ie same old crap, it is time to vote in new candidates. Time for change.
September 6th, 2008 at 7:38 pm
Hey ya, Walter and Charles, after watching the rodeo clowns at the Rep. National Convention, I’m just going to ignore everything you guys say, because it just doesn’t carry any credibility, and with the state this country is in, and with what we, as a nation, are responsible for overseas,, no Republican should have any say in what we do going forward, either as a nation, or as a city. As for John. R, I think you have it right that one of the candidates is a puppet and for the establishment, and she goes by the name of S.Chan. . She doesn’t have two legs to run on, and is being held up by the funds of a Mr. Johnathan Dutra, who has a very specific agenda for Chan if she is elected (heaven forbid).that’s right, we can connect the dots. money talks, my friends, money talks. And, Zinger, I think you have it wrong. the argus seems to be in bed with Dutra and his candidate chan, if this blog is any indication of the Argus’s position. oh, yeah, and No to “Minutemen”! We are supposed to be moving past this type of mentality. this country was built on the backs of immigrants. it was founded by immigrants (not counting the native Americans, who lets face it, got a bum deal, oh and the Africans, who didn’t want to come here in the first place! but i wont get into all of that)
Have a wonderful day, everybody!
September 6th, 2008 at 10:09 pm
Randy, Randy, Randy… I don’t even think your post is worth responding to. I do see that you’re into false-debates though! Oh how liberated you must feel, to have no point what so ever!
September 6th, 2008 at 10:14 pm
You must be careful, when mud-slinging, not to get any on Jon Simon!
September 6th, 2008 at 10:43 pm
Walter, you got mud on everyone. Just remember, he who throws mud gets muddy.
Mr. Wieckowski can boo whomever he wants. His right is protected in the Constitution. Remember that document? As for the parade, the Minutemen had no right to be in it and should be ashamed of their tantrum.
Torrico wants to balance the state budget and help those who need it. If that requires raising taxes, fine. If you think the government should butt out of helping people, realize that churches, charities, and businesses have just as much corruption and waste as the government, if not more. The difference is, government is accountable at election day.
September 7th, 2008 at 12:51 am
Bartlett, in your post, you say:
“I would not expect any similar endorsements coming from the county GOP. Nor do I expect any endorsements or support in anyway from local Republican leadership for my city council campaign…”
I would hope that in addition to these, you would not expect to even have a chance at sitting on our city council. Your platform is ridiculous, impractical, and at times offensive.
I would boo the minutemen too, if they marched in front of me. We are a diverse city, this is a diverse state. You have on your platform you want to “protect American labor”. And then you have these ridiculous ordinances attacking the jobs that are normally held by illegal immigrants from Mexico. You are very short sighted. These are jobs Americans do not want! The jobs Americans do want are being shipped overseas, to poor countries with cheap labor. This is the fault of the corporations, not the poor immigrants coming to this country. “Cracking down” on illegal immigration from Mexico is not going to protect American labor. We are stealing the wealth of the world and bringing it to this country for the benefit of the selected few. So what if these people come here and do work we do not want to do, in search of a few dollars to send home to their families, that are starving? Do you and your wife want to do the work they do? And then you say you want to encourage people to own guns as a civic duty! So that more little kids can get a hold of them? What’s your angle there?
I am embarrassed to have you on the Fremont ticket. Please go somewhere else. If anything, we need Minutemen who fight against the proliferation of Minutemen!
September 7th, 2008 at 1:01 am
Wow! Jon Simon says that I got mud on everyone because I call them like I see them. Mind you that I questioned the actions of elected representatives, not everyone. I can only feel sorry for you Jon Simon!
First, Wieckowski is free to voice his support, for or against the Minutemen and what they stand for. That is fine, of course. Although, as a locally elected leader he should be more tolerant of Fremont’s diverse points of view. I wouldn’t respect a Livermore City-Council member that booed 4th of July Parade participants, while they walked by, because he personally disagreed with them. The problem I have with Wieckowski starts when he uses his influence to bar the Minutemen from participating in the Parade. That’s a violation of his oath to “protect” and “defend” the Constitution. As a community-leader, he should have came forward and said, “The Minutemen should be allowed to march in the Parade… That’s their right as Americans.” That would have been “protecting” and “defending” the Constitution by Wieckowski. But instead, he issues public statements like, “I’d boo the Minutemen.” I would like to think our representatives would “protect” and “defend” our rights, before excercising their own.
Second, You ask me if I remember the Constitution? That’s a good one Jon, maybe even your best yet! So, you write, “Wieckowski can boo whomever he wants,” because that’s his Constitutional right… but then, in the next line, you write, “As for the Parade, the Minutemen had no right to be in it and should be ashamed of their tantrum.” Let me try to get you back on track here Jon… The 1st Amendment is not only about Wieckowski’s “freedom of speech” to boo the Minutemen, it’s also about each individual Minutemen’s right to “peaceably assemble” and take part in their own community-funded parade. Not to mention the fact that Fremont has a city-ordanance against excluding political organizations from city activities. What more do you want? You’re wrong, Wieckowski was wrong and the Minutemen marched in the Parade in true Constitutional fashion.
Last, you say, “Torrico wants to balance the state budget and help those who need it. If that requires raising taxes, fine.” Maybe you should be running for Council! That way Torrico could plant candidates everywhere that would promise the world to the voters, while creating a public that is helplessly dependant on the government to get by. Sorry Jon, raising my taxes for more bloated government is not “fine” with me! Balancing the budget will involve, budget cuts, elimanating wasteful programs, addressing special interests, more community over-site, and restoring Constitutional standards and our traditional principals of limited government.
September 7th, 2008 at 2:08 am
Randy I notice that you did not comment at all about the Torrico, Weicowski, and Trisha trifecta connection.
It’s clearly because you cannot dispute the establishment candidate badge they all carry. Instead you attack other candidates that have been unequivocally false by reporters.
Don’t distract from the simple fact: Torrico, Weicowski and Trisha = Machine Politics, as evidenced by this very blog.
Torrico already installed Trisha on the Ohlone board via Bill McMillin who sits on the Alameda County Democratic Party endorsement committee.
From an article that ran in the Argus:
“Trustee Bill McMillin made a motion to have Tahmasbi fill the vacancy, but Trustee John Weed felt a second round of voting on the leading candidates should happen.
That spurred Treadway to consult a copy of “Robert’s Rules of Order,” a 19th century legislative manual, to see whether the initial motion took precedence, as was the case.”
Trisha, contrary to popular belief was not unanimously appointed to the board, rather she was forced by a leader of the democratic party.
Enough is enough - say no to the Torrico Gang of Three - Torrico, Weicowski & Trisha.
September 7th, 2008 at 2:13 am
I also notice via Facebook that Randy Jamison went to Oklahoma State, as did Trisha. Check out his friends, many whom are Oklahoma State alumni.
http://www.new.facebook.com/people/Randy_Jamison/835781167
Nice to see that Trisha is asking her friends who have nothing to do with Fremont to attack other Fremont candidates.
September 7th, 2008 at 3:10 am
John R. = Dave Bonaccorsi ( A Sue Chan Loyalist and the Dutra Family Lawyer)
Mr. Bonaccorsi, since you are so into reading articles, why don’t you check the press release the college itself put out. I’ve provided an excerpt for you as well as a link:
“Fremont, CA — The Ohlone College Board of Trustees voted unanimously on Wednesday to appoint Ms. Trisha Tahmasbi to fill a vacant seat on their board….”
http://www.ohlone.edu/org/president/pressreleases/2007/20070423tahmasbiappointedtoboard.html
Dave Bonaccorsi, I’m sure the college would not publish misinformation about its own proceedings. And let me remind you Dave Bonaccorsi, that the Ohlone Board is a bipartisan board, made up of both democrats and republicans. I seriously doubt any “Democratic Party Machine” is powerful enough to influence the conservative republicans on that board, to result in a unanimous vote.
And where did these “Reporters” prove “unequivocally” that Chan is not riding in the pockets of John Dutra? I missed that press coverage. All this blog (if you can even call this press coverage) pointed out was what we already knew - that the contribution limits are capped at $500. That does not mean that John Dutra is not moving thousands of dollars for Sue Chan, and calling in favors from other contributors (I know it’s hard to believe that anyone would owe John Dutra a favor, he is by nature selfish and never does anything for anyone unless he will directly benefit (insert Mrs. Chan here) - that’s why he came in 3rd place in a senate race where he out spent his opponents 3 to 1, including nearly half a million dollars of his own money. What a shame.)
Sue Chan should have had the Chamber endorsement in the bag. But that did not happen, did it Dave? So it looks like your theory of a “Democratic Machine” is quickly dissolving. The Chamber is far from susceptible to any Democratic influence. The situation we had here was that the best candidate was endorsed for City Council by the Chamber of Commerce.
What you’ve got, Bonaccorsi, is a candidate that cannot stand on her own two feet and is being planted by a developer and his family (and their lawyer). So, in the words of Jon Simon, keep throwing your mud, and hoping that it conceals these facts.
September 7th, 2008 at 8:45 am
Jon Simon -
“Wieckowski can boo whomever he wants,” because that’s his Constitutional right…
“As for the Parade, the Minutemen had no right to be in it and should be ashamed of their tantrum.”
So, Wieckowski’s rights freedom of peaceful assembly and right to speak is protected by the Constitution but the Minutemen have no such right of peaceful assembly and right to speak ?
Oh my gosh, oh my gosh, oh my gosh. . . . where to start ???
September 7th, 2008 at 9:49 am
I can state with full confidence I am not Dave Bonacorssi.
You did not address the the Torrico gang of three issue - Torrico, Trisha, Weicowski. Instead you try to distract.
The Argus clearly stated that Bill McMillin forced a motion that the board found questionable.
The machine is at work folks…vote for change.
September 7th, 2008 at 10:13 am
If you look at Sue Chan’s endorsement list at http://www.suechanforfremont.com
There are over 350 members of the Fremont community who are endorsing Sue Chan.
Sue’s grassroots supporters come from all walks of life, they represent people from different ethnic groups, industries and parties.
No one person can fully fund anything, the support is so much it’s just impossible.
Campaign finance reports haven’t come out yet, so NO ONE except the FPPC knows how much any candidate has raised or from whom. Any person who asserts they have knowledge of their opponents financing is a liar or is violating the law.
September 7th, 2008 at 10:46 am
Oh, My…I haven’t been on the blogs in a while. Sorry if you guys missed me…
John R., Are you English Teacher from the other blog? Seems like you’ve got his childish rhetoric, and inability to respond without repeating the same old nonsense from your previous posts.
I would like YOU to address the “Dutra Gang of Three: John Dutra, His Wealthy Family, and a one Mrs. Suzanne Chan” issue if you respond to my post. Oh well. You guys really are a hoot!
Oh, and do your homework, Bonaducci, or English Teacher, Trisha transferred from the University of Oklahoma. Maybe instead of google searching the blog poster’s names, you should google search the candidate you are choosing to throw stones at, and actually read and learn about them…hmmmm, there’s a novel idea…do some research, genius.
Well back to the subject at hand..Why is it that when a talented young lady chooses the path of public service, and actually succeeds at it, and actually works toward causes that are important, the people around her, like David Bonaducci, or whatever your name is, start trying to tear her down, or insinuate that she doesn’t belong?
I was very surprised to see that Tahmasbi got the Chamber of Commerce endorsement. You want to know what that tells me, Bonaducci, it tells me that Trisha got into that endorsement interview and knocked their socks off! It tells me that she was able to answer tough questions from a mostly republican backed organization. Last year, the Chamber endorsed two candidates, this year, only one could stack up.
So sorry to put the kibosh on your hateful and childish rhetoric. Take it elsewhere.
To Trisha: Congratulations on the Chamber of Commerce Endorsement! Congratulations on the Democratic Committee endorsement! Our party is picking the best candidates this year! Don’t let the Bonaducci’s of the world get you down! There will be many of them, but they have no substance behind them whatsoever.
Susan M.
September 7th, 2008 at 12:17 pm
Thank you Zack for the comments.
All I can do to respond is…
http://www.charles4council.com
Read the petition. It squarely goes after the ‘corrupt businessmen’ who exploit illegal labor against American labor. True, most illegal labor is from Mexico (according to CIS about 60%), so to some degree Mexican population flows do characterize the problem of importing surplus labor. But how do you address this problem when?:
1. Union leadership is totally corrupt and in bed with Democrat globalists. They will cooperate with massive boycott/strike of 10,000’s for Amnesty in 2006, but refused the same during the 1992 NAFTA signing as well as during the 2008 NAFTA superhighway deal.
2. OUr national government refuses to protect our borders and shield US citizens from both crime and labor surpluses?
Thus, until the national government solves this matter, it will behoove lesser magistrates, such as local governments, to go after the bad guys– the employers. Why would you disagree with that? Do you need illegal slave labor to pick your fruit and serve and clean your dishes????
As far as blasting us for our associations with Republicans…
1. Third parties don’t work. What would you have us do? Minutemen only have a choice between the two parties.
2. Both leaderships are compromised. However, which of the two parties have constituencies which actually want to preserve our borders? Any recollection of how the House has voted on this question over the last three years would indicated the Republicans. So, this is the logical party to work within. That being said, we do not support the party leadership and want it to change– that includes “maverick” McCain! This is why the state GOP is suing us right now… Dear Zack, is the state GOP suing you?!?!? hmmmm.
3. You also omit there was a second REpublican convention held across the river from St. Paul that got less coverage but had more attendents. So obviously the GOP is not as monolithical as you posit. We do not all march behind the same drummer. If so, there’d be no reason to run since Steve Cho would have an identical website to myself, or I to him…? There are important differences, and these differences are life and death for us.
2. That being said, we are not opposed to Democrats who stand firm on this issue. We do have plans to do to Democrat county party the same we’ve done to the GOP. But that’s a much harder fight, and we aren’t ready yet. We aren’t strong enough. Give us time. It will come.
3. Is abolishing the nation-state, borders, and the whole concept of naturalization and citizenship “mentalities” contrary to the principals of the USA? Last time I checked, we were a nation with borders, and the US government was to protect the states from invasion and ensure a Republican form of government???? That was in that little piece of paper called the ‘constitution’…?
What amazes me is how people like Zack cannot concieve how big business is very much opposed to borders and nation-states. Why wouldn’t an international class want to abolish nation-states and replace such with regional markets and communities like EC? If people are commodities, wouldn’t NAFTA include the free flow of them as well?
The Minutemen welcome legal immigrants, but not invaders. Nor do we have any sympathy with small or big business employers who cheat to get ahead at the expense of the rest of us. Minutemen believe if we crackdown on employeers, about 99% of the problem will be fixed. However, not even Democrats (or the business Unions) are willing to do this….
Take time to read http://www.charles4council.com, especially the article on “wage vs. slave labor” and “politics of illusion”. There you will find a consistent defense of valourized labor as well as a critique on politics as mere technique.
sincerely,
charles
September 7th, 2008 at 12:51 pm
Trisha Tahmasbi was the best thing that ever happened to the Ohlone Board of Trustees. Now she will win this upcoming election with all the top endorsements and can continue in her path towards making a difference for Fremont without all this negativity.
John R. you said, “The same torrico gang is a rotating set of characters installing puppets and establishment candidates.” The puppets in this local election is everyone who abides by what that selfish DUTRA family says. Those are the puppets (i.e. Sue Chan, Teresa Cox, Bryan Gebhardt) any candidate that the Dutra family supports only to push their own agenda onto them once elected.
Walter GOP Livermore City-Chair you said, “Wieckowski - I don’t respect any elected representative who says that he’d “boo” the Minutemen, because they wanted to march in the Fremont 4th of July Parade. I can respect that Mr. Wieckowski may have a different point of view, than that of the Minutemen and their want to secure America’s borders, but as an “elected leader,” Mr. Wieckowski should let the Constitution widen his narrow-mind or at least, be his guide.” You argue no real point here. Wieckowski is using the constitution as his guide widening his mind that is why he has every right in the world to use his Freedom to speak and say he will boo the minutemen. Take a look at our first amendment right, a 5 year old can tell you this Mr.Livermore guy.I RESPECT individuals that have the courage to speak their mind.
September 7th, 2008 at 3:08 pm
Where did Oaklahoma resident and Trisha classmate Randy Jamison go? Apparently after getting called out for being an uninformed out of stater, he changed his name to “Ohlone Constiuent” and “Andrew P”. After following the blogs, Susan M, it’s my understanding is Trisha’s handle.
Not a single person has denied the Torrico Gang of Three - Torrico, Weicowski & Trisha. Maybe it’s because you can’t deny they are Democratic Machine candidates. Instead Trisha supporters try to pull over a mythical, untrue smokescreen trying to distract.
VOTE FOR CHANGE. VOTE DIFFERENT.
September 7th, 2008 at 3:16 pm
Where Wieckowski perhaps crossed the line was not free speech but showing intent to discriminate against the Minutemen when the city’s hired parade committee elected to place unique restrictions on Minutemen participation in the 4rth of July parade in 2007 and 2008–which no other group was likewise required to abide by.
Wieckowski is free to say anything he wants, but if the city renders itself liable to a discrimination suit, he may harm the city’s defense. Today, this is water under the bridge. The city legally did ‘the right thing at the end of the day’.
But since Wieckowski did share in the decisions of the parade committee, his “free speech” takes on a discrimintory hue. Discrimination is not only illegal but it certainly does not belong to the realm of “free speech”… The Minutemen were going to be treated in a manner different than other groups. That was the problem, and it based on a common sentiment in the city council.
It would have been up to the courts to decide this matter. However, the city did do the ‘right thing’ at the end of the day, backing off when our lawyer(s) called municipal offices. We did have substance to our charges otherwise we would have not made it in the parade at all.
sincerely,
charles
http://www.charles4council.com
http://www.cvminutemen.com
http://www.goldengateminutemen.com
September 7th, 2008 at 3:34 pm
John R.
Once again, another Sue Chan supporter without a brain to process information. Seriously, it seems like you guys really only have the ability to regurgitate. Please employ some critical thinking when you are posting to these public forums. What a group of supporters she’s got, what a group…I suppose if you could equate the brain power of those that support a candidate with the brain power of the candidates themselves that would be a very scary thought for Mrs. Chan!
I’d like to hear your response to the Dutra Gang of Three, English Teacher? Huh? You’re the one that seems to be attempting to distract from that. And what is this Democratic Machine propaganda you are trying to hype today? If I am a member of the Democratic party, am I am member of the “machine”?
Looks like the one who is uninformed is you. knowing nothing about the candidates (especially how corrupt the one you support is) and just blindly throwing stones at other candidates. Like I said before, genius, goggle the candidates or send them a message before coming on here and discussing anything about them.
Please get a life, English Teacher. Get a life!
Those against Sue Chan and John Dutra can play the same game you are playing…
Say NO to the Dutra Family! Say NO to Suzanne Chan! Say NO to corruption and bribery! Say NO to Suzanne Chan! Say NO to candidates that can’t think for themselves! Say NO to Suzanne Chan!
Vote for Change! Vote Different! VOTE AGAINST THE DUTRA FAMILY! Say NO to Suzanne Chan! The last thing Fremont needs is Suzanne Chan, and more Dutra involvement.
Say NO to John Dutra for City Council!
Say NO to Suzanne Chan!
How was that?
Susan M.
September 7th, 2008 at 4:08 pm
Oh, yeah, and one more thing, John R.
If Trisha is a member of your so-called democratic machine, why isn’t the mayor endorsing her?
Please answer this question. I know you won’t, but it is worth a shot.
September 7th, 2008 at 4:17 pm
The Minutemen have a constitutional right to march in any parade? I believe they do if it’s government funded, but I also believe it wasn’t this year. The Tournament of Roses doesn’t have to let the Minutemen march either.
Arguing ideas is different from slinging mud. Arguing ideas helps everyone. Slinging mud generally sickens everyone, so yes, it affects us all.
September 7th, 2008 at 5:01 pm
John R. - before assuming I am Randy Jamison use you intellect if you have any and read my post on previous articles.
Charles - the city did in fact do the right thing at the end of the day. Yet the minutemen being given those restrictions was perhaps only for a city to be protected. Free Speech will always have two sides. I can, with the protection of the Bill of Rights, go out and say “Boo” to any individual’s ideas I do not agree with. Saying “Boo” to a group a people walking in a parade shows our great nation at work. Not afraid to speak and show which side they support. Respectful? Of course not. Discriminatory? Perhaps. Yet all speech will never be politically correct, clean, respectful and siding with how the majority feels.
September 7th, 2008 at 5:04 pm
Susan M, I believe, as a person who has served Fremont as a loyal servant for many years, the Mayor is endorsing candidates based on who he believes is best for Fremont.
Is there a question that endorsing Trisha, an employee of Torrico, would give that endorser the favor of Torrico and benefit them politically? It’s great to see that some community leaders give their endorsements for the betterment of the city over their their own political futures.
September 7th, 2008 at 5:07 pm
Ohlone Constituent, You have a very limited understanding of the Constitution.
I didn’t say that Wiechowski couldn’t throw his little fit on the side-lines of the Parade. The constitutional issue here is, Wiechowski should have lived up to his sworn oath of office to “protect and defend” the Constitution. All elected officials take this oath because Constitutional rights don’t protect or defend themselves. It’s our job to stand-up and speak-out in defense of the Constitution and our rights as Americans.
“Protecting” the Constitution would have involved, Wiechowski pointing-out to the Parade organizers and city-leaders that their exclusionary tactics were unconstitutional and a direct violation of the individual Minuteman members’ right peaceably to assemble! “Defending” the Constitution would have involved, Wiechowski taking a stand for the each individual Minuteman and saying, “I may not agree with the Minutemen, or support what they stand for, but I do respect their rights as Americans and they should be able to march in the Parade.”
That would have been the “constitutional” thing to do, and way more important than Wiechowski exercising his own personal right of “freedom of speech” to boo the Minutemen as they passed by.
Ohlone Constituent, I hope you understand where I’m coming from. We could all learn a little from this and turn a negative into a positive! Even though I support the Minutemen, if Wiechowski was yelling and booing as the Minutemen marched by, and was then tackled by police, who then told Wiechowski to shut-up and stop pandering for votes. I would speak-up for Wiechowski’s right to say what he wants and express how he feels. Even though, I believe, that Council-Member Wieshowski should be more reserved with his personal opinions beings that he’s an elected leader of the community.
With any right, comes responsibility! It is Wiechowski’s right to boo the Minutemen… but it is also his responsibility to protect and defend the Constitution… which is about preserving all of our individual rights, not just your own personal ones. We’re all in this one together, that’s why it says, “We the People!”
September 7th, 2008 at 5:37 pm
I’m not the same person as John R, but his opinions are backed up with researched, whereas Susan M has thrown out unsubstantiated innuendo.
Trisha or Susan M or whatever you call yourself these days, under your rubric, a NO to Sue Chan is a NO to her supporters, to be clear.
Trisha / Susan M is saying:
NO to Bob Crevling (Senior Citizens Commission)
NO to Garrett Yee (President Ohlone College Trustees)
NO to Mike Wallace (President, Washington Hospital Trustees)
NO to Bernie Stewart (Washington Hospital Board)
NO to Richard King (Chair, Planning Commission)
NO to Teresa Cox (Chair, Economic Development)
NO to Mary Hayashi (Assemblymember)
NO to over 350 Fremont Community Members
September 8th, 2008 at 12:51 am
Correction: Teresa Cox has endorsed and supports Trisha Tahmasbi.
Garrett Yee supports Sue Chan because he is the Former President’s (Doug Treadway) puppet as well as the Dutra’s loyalist and a flip flopper who has no voice of himself.
Mary Hayashi only supports Sue Chan to get her husband more supporters by staying “safe” w/the Dutra clan.
I’m sure the rest may have connections with the Dutra’s if not then they may be good friends of Sue’s Dentist husband if not that then she got lucky being good friends with Mayor Wasserman.
Tahmasbi’s list of top endorsers exceed the number of Chans’. That shows more people are not afraid to go against the Dutras. Which shows the amount of people that do not want Fremont to be ran by a developer family who abuses their power for their own self-interest.
September 8th, 2008 at 11:03 am
As of 9/8/2008, five weeks after announcing her candidacy, Trisha has no public list of supporters.
The only way ? would have any information on endorsers is if you are part of the Trisha’s campaign.
Interesting to see the Official Trisha campaign attacking Fremont community leaders.
September 8th, 2008 at 5:51 pm
Wow, Sue Chan is listing endorsements she doesn’t have? Even Charles, the Minuteman wouldn’t do that.
September 8th, 2008 at 6:02 pm
If you attended or are a member of the TCDF or would like to get involved for once instead of wasting your time on these blogs trying to get information then you would have noticed on her papers out that day that she had a public list of supporters! Open your eyes!
September 8th, 2008 at 6:03 pm
Correction: If you attended the TCDF interview/event Saturday - open to the public.
September 8th, 2008 at 9:50 pm
Matt in response to Zack’s inaccurate post, we think a Truth Patrol is in order. When Zack’s comment is proven to be false, please remove the comment.
September 8th, 2008 at 11:31 pm
http://www.suechanforfremont.com/sue_chan_fremont_endorsements.html
All her endorsements are listed on her webpage. Check it out.
September 8th, 2008 at 11:42 pm
I would say that Matt does not respond to posters’ requests for truth patrols (lord knows I’ve tried), but since you are a Sue Chan supporter, you may just get your wish.
It seems that Zack is asking a question. Questions are usually concluded with a question mark, while comments generally end with a period, FYI.
Zack: I think what happened is that Teresa Cox may have endorsed both of them. English Teacher is making it sound like she is only endorsing Chan. That may have been where the confusion came from.
“? Is Right”: you should have opted for a truth patrol at that point.
Susan M.
September 11th, 2008 at 12:28 am
These attacks against Trisha are pretty disgusting. If you like Sue Chan– that’s great. She has an impressive resume, and would be a great city council member.
The problem is that Sue Chan’s supporters seem hell bent on tearing down Trisha instead of informing us of why her policies and proposals are better than her opponents’.
But really, calling Trisha a puppet of Assemblymember Torrico is extremely dismisive of her accomplishments. She has probably helped a ton of people throughout her career since folks who work in legislative offices are essentially social workers.
She is breaking barriers for us young folk who are often left out in the decision-making process.
September 11th, 2008 at 1:33 am
I know Sue and I do not think she would be supportive of her supporters attacking anyone - she is a mom, that is not what she stands for. Sue stands for bringing folks together like she did in Celebrate Fremont. I support Sue because of her long standing roots in the community, her leadership in various non-profits and community groups, and her priorities for the city.
In reading through these comments, the posts that are attacking Trisha do not say that they support Sue. With 10 candidates in the running, and the anonymity here, who knows who these people support! Truth be told, when the words “Puppet” “Trisha” and “Sue” appear in the same comment they are all attacks against Sue!
I too hope that the negativity will stop.
September 11th, 2008 at 11:42 pm
I think it’s virtually implicit that the ones viciously tearing down Ms. Tahmasbi are supporting Sue.
I dislike the negativity because I think either candidate would be great for Fremont. They’re both VERY accomplished and bring unique skill sets and points of view to the job. Both of these people have not only got the endorsements of important local movers and shakers, but they’ve also helped a ton of people throughout their careers.
Here’s to hoping the negativity stops, and acknowledging the other’s accomplishments.
September 12th, 2008 at 11:54 am
It is EXPLICIT that Tahmasbi supporters are actively and EXPLICITLY insulting Sue’s accomplishments, Sue’s community involvement, Sue’s intelligence… ANY PERSONAL attacks are uncalled for and mean spirited. Questioning’s one connections versus their intelligence are two very different magnitudes of order.
Sue is a very intelligent, thoughtful lady who is a leader who has actively made our community better for the last twenty years.
I do agree, hopefully everyone can focus on their own candidates, and why they are great. Who knows Diamond, maybe both shall be elected!
September 12th, 2008 at 8:36 pm
Sue supporters have provided their fair share of mean spirited comments. Please don’t paint a one-sided picture.
All of the candidates are intelligent, and all of them have served the community in one way or another. We have to look at who has the capacity to lead and to make tough decisions, without being jaded by outside influences.
September 16th, 2008 at 8:48 pm
Weickowski loses my vote for his “wait and see” position on the A’s stadium.. . . . the guy has no problem verbalizing his position on so many matters, and even states that he is ready to tell people “…what they NEED to hear..” - how presumptuous - but the conflict he creates is in taking a “wait and see” position (my personal interpretation is, he’s just hoping to get thru the election before he tips his CIsco Field hand to the taxpayers). Further, he lost serious points making a decision to conduct a flawed “mission” to our sister city half-a-world away when by all accounts, the city was reportedly in economically challenged times.
That the “Democratic Forum” chose him for their recommendation despite these flaws, calls their “recommendations” into serious question, and that Tahmasbi got the nod of this same seemingly flawed forum is enough for me to rule her out.
Movin’ on down the list of prospects - Bacon stays high on my list.
October 1st, 2008 at 12:38 pm
I am Larry Montgomery and I am a candidate for city council. After reading all the above comments I sense that there is a fair amount of community tension towards some of the other candidates. I propose that we hold a public debate and invite all of the city council candidates to address what they stand for and give them a chance to show their moxy. We can all challenge one another on Fremont’s issues. The voting citizens of Fremont should also be allowed to ask each candidate specific questions. One last thing the candidates cannot have notes or scripts to read during this debate. If you agree and you want to see a debate then contact Mr. Artz with the Argus and ask him get it going.
October 1st, 2008 at 12:59 pm
I agree completely with Larry Montgomery. Let us have a honest debate with the City Council candidates. Also, the incumbent’s record should be made known to the public by the way they voted on so many issues which came up for City Council Vote in the last 4 years.
The City of Fremont should not be run by people supported by vested interests. The last several days of unfolding events in the nation and the dismal approval ratings of Congress and California legislature clearly indicate that people are fed up with the status-quo. Same is applicable for Fremont too.
It is time for new people and new thinking who are not endorsed or funded by vested interests, be it the developers, party establishment etc. etc.