There is a very disturbing trend occurring with the signs of David Harmer’s opponents in the California 2010 Congressional District 11 Republican primary election.
At least some of the signs for Tony Amador, Elizabeth Emken and Brad Goehring — David Harmer’s three opponents in the upcoming primary — have been damaged in recent days.
Oddly enough, however, none of Harmer’s signs seem to have suffered similar “wind damage” or the like.
The video has more on this subject, including evidence of the damage that has happened to these signs:
Who or what is behind the damage which has befallen these signs, and why does it appear that the signs of David Harmer have not been similarly affected?
Are you kidding me? No, I’m serious, are you kidding me? Let me tell you right now in my personal opinion Lisa V from the CC Times is a JOKE, ok!? In my personal opinion, anyone, I mean ANYONE (Tom Del Beccaro, Harmer, etc.) who works closely with her on our side has ZERO credibility, NONE, ZIP! In fact, you’ve exp…osed yourself.
What I want to know is this, Read this GLOWING piece on Harmer/Meese below and ask yourself these KEY questions:
1.) How is it that the CONTRA COSTA Times goes all the way down to near Gilroy for this story? Uh, it’s not in CC, it’s not breaking news? It’s not really news, but yet Lisa V goes way out of her way for this story. Yeah, Harmer is running for a district in CC , but uh, hmm, I’d call it a stretch.
2.) What exactly is the story? Is there a REALLY a story? Ed Meese does Harmer fundraiser, wow…stop the presses, lol. Are you serious? How many other fundraisers of Emken’s, Goehring’s, Amador’s, etc. have been covered with this kind of attention and glowing press and a personal visit & photo ops by Lisa V? Look, I love Ed too, but, uh…I had a one-hour exclusive interview with Ed like 14 years ago for the law school newspaper at Berkeley I started & I didn’t catch the national papers burning my phone to reprint it. I’m just saying….
3.) On that note: How many positive articles on Harmer has Lisa V done? How many negative? How many positive on Brad Goehring (In my opinion, the front runner and biggest threat to McNerney) has Lisa V done and how many has she done that have been negative, or critical on Brad or his campaign? How about Emken and Amador? Kind of interesting when you add those numbers up no?
4.) Why is it that Lisa V shows up to a lot of events that Tom Del Baccaro is at? That’s kinda weird huh? Why do I hear rumors that Tom is unofficially supporting Harmer? Huh? Did you know that allegedly Tom Del Beccaro and David Harmer have the same political consultant (Tim Clark)? Huh, that’s kinda strange. Why do I hear rumors that the CCRP is emailing people asking them to phone bank for Harmer? Now that is really weird. I hope those rumors aren’t true as ALL official GOP party orgs/people are supposed to be neutral in the primary!
5.) Do you think for a second that the CC Times or Lisa V will back/endorse or in any significant way support our CD-11 GOP nominee over Democrat incumbent Congressman Jerry McNerney whom the CC Times endorsed last election?
Why would you listen to their advice then? Do you think Lisa V really likes or admires Reagan, Meese, or Karl Rove? Yet she shows up at these events and gives in my opinion temporary glowing coverage, weird huh? Don’t you think Harmer and Tom Del Becarro know how Lisa V seems to feel about conservatives? What then does that say to you about how Harmer’s camp is approaching this election and their credibility?
6.) Finally, read the “news story” below and ask yourself this one last question. If the byline was taken off, could you tell the difference between this article from Lisa V of the Contra Costa Times and a press release from the Harmer Campaign? Be honest.
Note: ALL of this entire post and associated content are my personal opinion only (i.e. it does not represent the views of any of my clients or campaigns I/Conservative New Media work(s) on) and I make NO factual claims whatsoever, nor cast aspersions on anyone in any way. This is all intended for informational and entertainment purposes only. I am merely expressing my opinion as an American and conservative who is interested in seeing fairness and transparency in the media and the CRP/GOP nominating process & to fight the MSM from possibly manipulating that. I am simply asking questions and it is up to you to do your own diligence and make up your own mind.
We are less than three weeks away from the California primary, and some of you may have already received your ballots by mail. It’s time to get serious about our future.
I’ve been saying since the 2008 General Election that this would be the most important election year in most of our lifetimes. And I don’t mean the election in November. It’s the primaries that matter, people. For those with a Tea Party mindset, we’ve been complaining for over a year that we need candidates who are grounded in Constitutional thinking. The only way that happens is through the primaries.
Let’s take the 11th District in California, for example. This is my home district and the one that I will be voting in on June 8th. There are four Republican candidates vying to unseat two-term incumbent Democrat Jerry McNerney. No one is going to confuse McNerney with a Constitutionalist. He votes in lock-step with Nancy Pelosi, and we know where she stands. So, what about these Republicans?
I’ve been following this race since last fall when candidates first started announcing their intentions to run. I’ve watched the four remaining candidates (two have since dropped out) at various forums and public events, and listened to them on the radio. I’ve studied their websites to get an idea of who these people are and what they believe in. And, on the surface, they all appear to be saying the right things. But if you dig a little deeper, there are some issues that I feel deserve to see the light of day.
Let’s start with David Harmer. Harmer entered the race in January, after all the other candidates had long declared. Harmer lives in San Ramon, but OUTSIDE the district. He won’t even be able to vote for himself. He’s an attorney (wanting to represent a largely agricultural district) who has run for Congress twice before unsuccessfully, once in Utah in 1996 and again last year in a special election in his own district (CD-10) where he lost to John Garamendi. He apparently supports homosexual marriage. He has received about 84% of his contributions from outside the district in which he is running. I believe he is the establishment candidate. Why else the late entry into the race, and all the money from around the country instead of within the district? In addition, his endorsement by the California Republican Assembly is dubious, at best. Having attended the last two San Joaquin CRA meetings, I was privy to the shenanigans that took place to ensure that Harmer would get the endorsement. I don’t think Harmer is the kind of candidate that true conservatives want. Now, if you’re voting Republican, and not conservative………..
Elizabeth Emken is an interesting story. She is a former employee of IBM, and for the last couple of years has been a lobbyist for Autism Speaks, an advocacy group. Her background would indicate the type of person that you might consider as a great Congresswoman, were it not for the lobbying activity. From her own website: ”Elizabeth joined Autism Speaks in March 2007 to manage the relationship between the organization and the federal government, state governments, and related agencies.” In my opinion, if part of her job there wasn’t dedicated to ELIMINATING the relationship between the organization and the federal government, then she’s missed the boat. As great a cause as Autism Speaks is, it has no business lobbying from the federal government, as that would be outside of their Constitutional mandate. Emken says on her website that she is for limited government and lower taxes, but her actions don’t quite bear that out.
Antonio “Tony” Amador is a retired U. S. Marshal with an extensive law enforcement background. He spent 13 years as an LAPD officer, and since has served at the request of governors and presidents in various law enforcement roles. He makes for an intriguing candidate. He seems to have the right answers to all the questions, but all of the candidates do. My question of Amador is like that of Emken and Harmer. You’re all insiders to a degree, having spent time in “the machine”. How do I know that you won’t be just another Washington elitist once you’re elected?
And lastly, there’s Brad Goehring. Goehring is a wine grape grower in the Lodi/Clements area, and has lived in the district for his entire life, save his college years. He knows what it means to be a victim of an out-of-control government. He was almost charged with “filling and destroying waters of the U. S.” by the Army Corps of Engineers….on his own property. He has since become an expert on the Clean Water Act. He calls himself a conservative before a Republican, so he doesn’t seem to have any deep party connections, like some of the others do. This is the one issue that I think sets him apart from the other candidates. He’s one of us, not one of them.
I’m supporting Brad Goehring and will be filling out my mail-in ballot soon. Take the time to learn about these candidates, and make an informed choice. The only way that we take back Washington is if we elect people like ourselves to represent us. People who understand the Constitution and it’s limitations, and then defend it with everything they have.
Originally posted at restoreconservatism,blogspot.com by Evan Stone. The opinions expressed in the above article are those of Evan Stone, and not necessarily those of Conservative New Media. Evan Stone is not paid by any political campaign or by Conservative New Media, and provides the above article as a guest contributor to Conservative New Media.
Full disclosure, I am a paid staff member of the Goehring for Congress campaign. This article is solely meant to reflect my personal views as a political observer. I apologize for any misunderstanding arising from the lack of a disclosure on initial publication. David Creager (dcreager123@yahoo.com).
Anyone who paid attention to high school level American History learned about carpetbaggers, northerners who went to the south to run for office after the civil war. It’s an old tactic for cheap political victory and personal gain, but does it still mean that? In my home congressional district there are two Republicans carpetbagging in order to run against a vulnerable incumbent. Thus the question arises, are they running because they are a good candidate, because they represent their potential constituents, or are they running for personal enrichment and a political job?
These two candidates, Larry Pegram and Tony Amador are both from outside of the 11th district as recently as within the last month or two. Furthermore, they are way out. The district is comprised of the east bay area and the San Joaquin valley, yet Larry Pegram lives in San Jose, and Tony Amador recently moved from Sacramento. Neither of which have any tie in any sense to the 11th Congressional district. They don’t like to talk about this fact, yet the fact remains they don’t even know our district. Pegram was even quoted recently as claiming McNerney rode the Obama wave into office, even though he was elected two years before Obama even ran for president. Obviously he is out of touch with even the most basic history of the district. None of the candidates have a background in transportation, a key issue in the east bay, and only one Republican, Brad Goehring, has a history in Ag and Water issues, the key issues in the valley. Just recently in that much talked about special election in NY-23 where the conservative party candidate took on a Democrat head to head after Scazzofava the liberal Republican dropped out the conservative lost. Not because he didn’t represent the district, the district is a strongly conservative district, but because Congressional elections are local elections, and the Conservative candidate was not a resident of the district.
So what causes a candidate like Larry Pegram or Tony Amador to run for a district in which they have no history, no name ID, no knowledge of key local issues, and no ability to raise money?
Here’s what I want to know, and I would love your feedback on this issue, does it bother you to see candidates relocate simply for a job? Should constituents demand their candidates for office be local to the position they are running for? And, should state law be amended to bar candidates from running who do not have an established residence in a district, at least at the time they file for office, and possibly for 3-6 months in advance?
Full disclosure, I am a paid staff member of the Goehring for Congress campaign. This article is solely meant to reflect my personal views as a political observer. I apologize for any misunderstanding arising from the lack of a disclosure on initial publication. David Creager (dcreager123@yahoo.com).
Historically reasonable Democrats and Republicans have pretty much agreed on one thing, a strong national defense and a well funded military is necessary to the freedoms we hold dear in America. Yet, one congressional candidate, a republican no less, from my home district, CD-11 in California, apparently disagrees. The candidate’s name is Robert Beadles, and he calls himself a conservative, yet I’m not sure which side he really is on.
Two things clued me in. First was a radio interview that Beadles bragged about through his campaign. He was on with a host named Alex Jones. This is a guy who was the executive producer of the film “Loose Change” a “documentary” about how the 9/11 massacre by Muslim terrorists was really an inside job perpetrated by war mongering Republicans, one-world-government Democrats, and Zionist Jews with a thirst for innocent Muslim blood. Yet when Beadles began his interview he gushed all over Jones and credited Jones with shaping his politics. It was a foolish interview at best, and at worst a declaration of shared beliefs. This is just the kind of fringe radical we don’t need running for office on the Republican ticket, let the Peace and Freedom party take it on.
The second clue was a front and center poll on his website here which asks the question, how much does it cost to send a soldier to Afghanistan. His answer, 1 million dollars. A shocking example of how ineffective government is completing any job? Yes. An appropriate focus for this election cycle? Absolutely not. It tells you something about a candidate when in the era of big government socialism, the takeover of the healthcare industry, cap and trade, unions running roughshod over our constitution, free speech and fox news being attacked boldly by the least honorable white house in recent history, and a plummeting dollar value a candidate is really worried about how much it costs to complete a military mission. This man is not a conservative, he’s hardly a Republican in my personal opinion.
At the same time we work to eliminate the left wing republican checkered pants club from our party in exchange for patriotic conservative leaders, we must also eliminate the crazy radicals who the national media loves to latch on to in order to paint us all as out of touch and radical. We lost the white house, we lost the senate, and we lost the house, not only because our party lost touch with its conservative roots but also because leaders arise within the party that were not conservatives. The national media then paints these non conservatives as conservatives because they are Republicans in name. Our brand is then damaged, how much worse if we let these fringe types take advantage of the bullhorn that is the Republican party.
Looking through old media clippings found this gem published by the Oakland Tribune in early 2007. It’s no wonder that Jerry McNerney quickly became the puppet of Nancy Pelosi and the rest of the liberal elite in Washington (97% in line voting with Pelosi). McNerney quickly has become a liberal lapdog, I guess he just wanted the adoration:
”
When Rep.-elect Jerry McNerney strolled into the freshman orientation reception in a Washington, D.C., hotel earlier this month, heads turned.
And why not? Hes the most famous freshman in the upcoming 110th Congress.
McNerney even has a nickname, the dragon-slayer, in honor of his wildly unexpected triumph Nov. 7 over seven-term incumbent and powerful committee Chairman Republican Richard Pombo.
Someone walked up to me right away and said, Youre Jerry McNerney! They recognized me from my picture, said a slightly astounded McNerney. I thought, Wow, thats different.’”
”
This email went out to constituents in the following congressional districts, and by doing so revealed what the NRCC is identifying as the weakest members of congress: Chet Edwards (TX-17), Martin Heinrich (NM-01), Jerry McNerney (CA-11), Ed Perlmutter (CO-07), John Salazar (CO-03), Kurt Schrader (OR-05), Dina Titus (NV-03), David Wu (OR-01)
Friends,
Democrats are worried this morning and rightfully so! Last night, election results showed significant wins for Republicans and an overwhelming shift away from the Democrats’ big-government, job-killing, tax-and-spend policies and toward the Republicans’ agenda of fiscal responsibility, smaller government and job creation. You can smell the fear in the air, as they realize that their Democrat incumbents are headed back home permanently next November.
Please consider the following comment from the NRCC as you cover Jerry McNerney’s extremely slim chances of survivability:
“Jerry McNerney is shaking in his boots today as he woke up to a rude awakening that the detrimental, job-killing policies he is pushing through Congress could cost him his job next year. Does Jerry McNerney now regret supporting Nancy Pelosi’s big-government, tax-and-spend agenda nearly 90 percent of the time or will he continue to march in lock-step with Pelosi at the cost of hurting California’s middle-class families?” – Joanna Burgos, NRCC Spokeswoman
