Posted by Stacey to the Rescue!, a resident of the Apperson Ridge neighborhood, on Jul 9, 2012 at 7:08 am
If multi-angle shots were being taken by a monolithic Internet company, it would be a triumph of free market capitalism. Unfortunately, it seems some people on the right have something to hide, and so they raise a fuss. I guess this is what Tea Partiers mean by transparency - not for US, for THEM!
Posted by liberalism is a disease, a resident of the Parkside neighborhood, on Jul 9, 2012 at 8:50 am liberalism is a disease is a member (registered user) of PleasantonWeekly.com
"Democrats, on the other hand, insist the videos are fair game — and are unapologetic about the hardball tactics."
Of course they would defend the indefensible. This is only slightly less sleazy than the tactics the unions use...at least to this point there's been no vandalism or physical violence. All attempts to intimidate their opposition since they can't win on their record or ideas. Truly pathetic, desperate and juvenile.
Posted by GO Gill !, a resident of the Another Pleasanton neighborhood neighborhood, on Jul 9, 2012 at 9:17 am
I question the real reason. I've met Ricky Gill on several occasions. Formidable opponent for empty suits.
Ricky's a high achiever as were his parents. Ricky is a recent Law grad. He's worked in all areas of his family fruit growing business in central valley.He has huge support East of here. I've met him twice, and is quite impressive in presenting himself and very articulate, which I'm sure puts fear in those unable to speak (won't mention any names). I believe his parents are orthopedic surgeons.
He has set records in his early fundraising.
I can see why McNerney wants to go to unusual lengths.
Posted by Mr. Mittens, a resident of another community, on Jul 10, 2012 at 6:09 am
There are many things acceptable in politics. Lying, deception, resistance to transparency. But I learned last night that a Democratic candidate had photographed an opponent's parent's house. (And a swell little hovel it is, in my view). That's beyond creepy. It's like ... Zillow! It's just WRONG on so many levels. I rather vote in a pathological liar than a creepy photographer, wouldn't you?
Posted by Steve, a resident of the Stoneridge neighborhood, on Jul 10, 2012 at 10:46 am
Very telling remarks from the snarky, juvenile impersonator regulars here. No intelligent debate. Just more of the same...
No excuses other than pointing to Andrew Breitbart or James O'Keefe. Or simplistic, uninformed comments alluding to the goals of the Tea Party. Or some childlike references to Mittens and his idea of large homes. Or comparing it to satellite photos on Zillow (you REALLY don't see the difference? -- and Bush was stupid???).
James O'Keefe produced confrontational or expose' type videos showing criminal or abusive behavior, much like Michael Moore's semi-fictional films. Andrew Breitbart didn't produce anything close to this type of video. He generally challenged the left to back up fraudulent claims.
These videos are just showing large homes, or maybe how little security candidates (or their parents) have protecting their homes or offices.
Could one of the snarks please explain why a large home is a bad thing for a candidate?
Could you also explain the reason for sneaking up and silently videotaping a candidate other than showing how easy it would be to attack them.
I think the Democrat incumbants are just trying to make it even more difficult to challenge the power of their incumbancy than it already is. It's quite sinister that our trusted public servants would stoop to these tactics.
Don't we have stalking laws to use against this practice?
Posted by Steve, a resident of the Stoneridge neighborhood, on Jul 10, 2012 at 11:45 am
FYI little Stacey, GOP family values include sex and even seduction.
That's usually the way to start a family. Of course, for snarky people of little intelligence, family values means living the life of a monk.
I don't even dispute the fraud or lies in the snarky, googly links you provide. Isn't it sad that the best argument you have is the small-minded claim that our public servants can do it because the worst of the other side did it?
Posted by Stacey to the Rescue!, a resident of the Apperson Ridge neighborhood, on Jul 10, 2012 at 11:59 am
I'm a little unclear on your slippery evasion. Are you admitting that Breitbart and O'Keefe stooped to outright fraud to make cheap manufactured political point or are you saying that they are the "worst" of the Republican activists? Either way, the only item you seem to disagree with me on is that you claim O'Keefe tried to lure a CNN journalist onto his sex boat because this is the way intelligent people start families. Isn't it sad that you think this behavior is appropriate?
Posted by Steve, a resident of the Stoneridge neighborhood, on Jul 10, 2012 at 7:06 pm
- You agree not to disclose personal information about another person, nor post anything that misleads others as to the source of the posting.
I wonder if any posts are misleading as to the source of the posting. Me thinks "Steve the mispeller from Parkside" isn't being quite honest about the source, is he? For that matter, neither is "Stacey to the Rescue!" (obviously posting as a snarky impersonation of Stacey).
Posted by Steve, a resident of the Parkside neighborhood, on Jul 11, 2012 at 2:18 am
"Me thinks 'Steve the mispeller from Parkside' isn't being quite honest about the source, is he?"
Methinks 'Steve the grammatical wonder from Stoneridge' isn't being quite honest either. Methinks he just isn't a 'quite honest' sort of guy. Where he missed out on grammar he seems also to have missed out on a bit more as well, such as how to construct basic validity claims or how to interpret and appreciate the validity claims of others.
Posted by Stacey to the Rescue!, a resident of the Apperson Ridge neighborhood, on Jul 11, 2012 at 7:58 am
To the angry/tantrumy Steve: where in the Constitution is there a guarantee of the right to privacy anyhow? Or do you believe that "what you feel ain't right" somehow has the force of law? A lot of dark deeds have been done under that assumption, and in fact there are some groups of dubious legality and morality you can join that might make you feel right at home. Got tats?
Posted by Steve, a resident of the Stoneridge neighborhood, on Jul 12, 2012 at 10:05 am
Thanks "Steve the misspeller" for setting me right on "methinks". I really didn't realize it was a single word rather than two. Surprising, considering your nickname. I know, off topic, but I had to give him/her their do.
On topic - McNerney can't run on his philosophy or record, so he stoops to the gutter to intimidate Ricky Gill instead. Slimey and dirty. Maybe he's trying to appeal to the Occupiers, but I can't believe that the other 99% of Americans would put up with that.