Recently, on the Teresa Barth campaign website she has asserted that two of the other candidates have made false statements about what her real platform is. She has wrongfully accused Dalager and Gaspar of 'dirty politics' in this election. What a laugh! That is coming from the dirties politician in the race. She accuses Dalager of dirty politics and lies, just after she has guided local journalists to print false stories about Dalager Himself. Mrs. Bart, you should be ashamed of yourself: you have let down the constituents and citizens of this town through not only your defaming and slandering of one of the last honest politicians left and a man who has always 100% delivered on his campaign promises. I don't say these things because I am some kind of a massive supporter of the Dalager campaign, or because I disagree with Barth's politics, but instead because I want to bring light to the true dirty politics of this election that have been a tactic of Teresa Barth as a last ditch attempt to save herself in an election because she doesn't have a platform that the city is interested in. At least Dan Dalager's tactics have involved discussion about your stance on the issues (whether he misrepresented them or not) instead of telling lies about corruption and bribery that have little factual basis and don't have anything to do with the issues facing the city.
At one point you may have been able to persuade me into supporting you Ms. Barth. Even after you spurred the Union Tribune to publish stories about bribery that the powers that be will prove never truthfully happened; maybe you were trying to out a bad politician. But after you have accused others of the same dirty politics you are committing, I can't abide any longer.
I don't advocate for Dalager Votes, just votes that aren't for Barth!
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Dear Anonymous
ReplyDeletePlease re-read your article. Do you notice how your essay is long on adjectives (dirty, dirtiest, real, honest, false, and factual) and adverbs (wrongfully and truthfully) and short on specific evidence?
If lies were told, what specifically were they? What evidence is there that they are lies? If there is slander and defamation, what specifically was said that is defamatory and/or slanderous? If we want less dirt in politics we need to have more specifics to back up our own political essays when they are in print.
Sincerely yours,
George
George I agree with your statement that in order to rid politics of dirt we need the specifics and I apologize for not being more specific, I am used to writing articles for people who are usually very up-to-date on the city politics and are usually fairly aware of my references. This is something I will have to adjust to when writing a blog for all the internet to read.
ReplyDeleteTo be specific on the dirty politics I was referring to:
Because of the fact Teresa Barth doesn't have a platform to stand on, she found a writer at the Union Tribune that was in danger of losing his job if he did not find a few good stories to report on and gave this writer a tip on a few fraud stories (the kitchen appliance story and the loan story) in order to slander Dalager.
You will do well to notice that the California Fair Political Practices Commission has dropped the case against Dan Dalager. It has been rumored that the commission has about 30,000 claims right now and most of them are just election time smearing.
In addition, I would like to note that I am not Anonymous, If anyone were to ever ask me who I am, I would be more than happy to give my Identity.
I would like to ask you the following:
ReplyDeleteWhat is your full name?
Just for the record-Do you live in Encinitas? (Probably a stupid question as I am sure you do:)
What is your profession?
TI think that's all for now. Good luck with your blog.
Thank you for the information.
Sorry, I made a typo above. I should have said "I think that's all for now"
ReplyDeleteMy name is Derrik Marow, I am a city of Encinitas Resident, and I am a junior at San Dieguito Academy.
ReplyDeleteCan I ask what those questions are regarding?
I have to agree with George. Familiarity or not with the details, your piece is certainly lavish on opinion and frugal on statements of fact.
ReplyDeleteSince to me it appears Barth does in fact have a platform, maybe you could start there. Demonstrate how she does not have one and instead relies on finding about-to-be-fired journalists as a lynchpin in her political strategies.
Remember Erik that this is a opinion blog.
ReplyDeleteI believe that people are disinterested in Barth not only because of the in-fighting she has tried to bring to the council. In addition, the fact that she has been a quiet fighter of the park is something that is not appealing.
I think it was the Dalager 'Scandals' That placed him at the bottom of the polls. I also unfortunately think that the Tony Kranz 3rd place was a result of this totally B.S. assault accusation by Ogden. which posed the 'lesser of the evils' barth to come in second to the little known Kristin Gaspar.
Derrik: I asked who you were because you said if anyone wanted to know you would tell. There was nothing more than interest, thats all.My daughters went to San Dieguito, when it was just a high school. Great school. Have fun with your blog.
ReplyDeleteDerrik:
ReplyDeleteI wish you luck on your new blog. However, you are not off to an auspicious beginning. Your blog is loaded with opinions, but has a dearth of facts to support what you say. It reads more like a rant or harangue, rather than a well reasoned expression of opinion.
For example, let's talk about Dalager. I have known him twice as long as you are old. I consider him a friend, but have never voted for him. The charges against him are not mudslinging or fabrications. These charges are serious business and go to the heart of honest government - selling votes for political gifts. The DA's office in San Diego is investigating. I am hugely disappointed in Dalager, but not completely surprised.
Your comment about Barth being "a quiet fighter of the park" makes me think that you are ignorant of the history of the park. The property was bought in 2001, and Barth didn't even get on the council until 2006. She has never fought the park, only argued and voted for a balanced community park that maintains community character and respects the neighborhood. Are you unaware that the Planning Commission voted 3 to 2 to not approve the park design? And what is unappealing about voting for what the majority of citizens in Encinitas support? The city's own Godbe Survey from July 2000 showed that only 10%-20% supported active sport use and 80%-90% supported open space and passive use. You were in grade school when all of this started. You need to do some research, otherwise your opinions aren't worth reading.
I totally disagree with your comments about censorship on The Leucadia Blog. I was there the first year, and I have never had my comments removed. Your petulant remarks seem immature and smart alecky. A little more maturity in your responses will go a long ways to get the respect you seem to be expecting. I suggest you write an essay and submit it to K.C. and J.P. Both have always been respectful to me.
Cardiffian you make some good points, let me discuss them out of order.
ReplyDeleteFirst, as far as the censorship claims:
I assure you I had attempted multiple times to post it; perhaps there was a was a technology problem. I apologize for accusing the Leucadian of censorship; but know, that at the time that I wrote this post, I truly did believe that the comments I was making on the Leucadian were being deleted.
If my comments have been as some would say "not truthful" it was due to a misunderstanding not malice.
As far as the Dalager situation goes, I personally am not convinced in the charges, that is all my post is meant to say, is that I as of now with what I have seen do not believe in the bribery reports. If others are convinced otherwise, good for them, let them discuss that here. I hope and believe that if I am wrong about Dalager, the best thing it can bring about is discussion on the matter. That is what my blog is intended for: to spur discussion. So in short, if I am factually lacking on any matter, I encourage all to present evidence of otherwise in order to facilitate and further the discussion.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteDerrik,
ReplyDeleteDid you send an email? I do have an idea for really good thing the youth commission might want to address.
I don't get the appliance thing. I really don't believe the Gordons needed to bribe Dalager. So I don't buy it. Dalager didn't need extra motivation. On the other hand I don't think elected officials should take deals the general public can't get.
I'm not sure you're right that the FPPC dropped the case. They seemed to have upgraded it it.
The loan issue was simply not smart to be closed up on. He could have diffused that issue by putting out all the details of the loan.
He also could have alleviated a lot of other concerns if he let the press confirm that his appliances were just junk.
I have a few questions about your post.
1. You write, “just after she has guided local journalists to print false stories about Dalager Himself.” Which stories have been false and why do you think Barth guided journalists in those stories?
2. What were Dalager’s 02 and 06 campaign promises?
3. How do you assess a politician’s honesty?
4. Are you saying that Barth did not have policy stances at the forums or in her literature? I know she stated her position on taxation, borrowing, pensions, open government, upzoning and the independence of the SDWD.