I don't typically confute bad press, but in this case, there's more at play than just the typical slur.
See: http://lafirst.org/...
In the Contra Costa Times it was reported by LISA VORDERBRUEGGEN posted on Sun, May. 07, 2006:
"A few days before the [State] convention, Filson campaign manager Robert Kellar called Stella Lopez, president of the Latina Democratic Club of Stockton and a convention delegate.
Kellar shared with her that McNerney had endorsed a book authored by Stacey Tallitsch, a nearly unknown, liberal Louisiana congressional candidate.
Why worry? It's a bombastic compendium that suggests, among other things, that continued GOP rule will result in a slave labor society where our daughters will have to become prostitutes in order to pay the bills. Tallitsch also compared the GOP business model with the rise of Adolf Hitler. Ouch."
"Ouch" is right. Such sweeping generalizations and inaccurate reporting are GOP copyright material.
It does seem odd that I would be the center of controversy half a country away, but here we are. Nevertheless, after Ms. Vordenbrueggen's apparent disgust with "bombastic" writing, she provided us with a little taste of it.
"But Filson's people did what McNerney failed to do: They checked Tallitsch out and learned he doesn't have enough money in his campaign coffers to rise to underdog status. He's more of an undermouse."
The Contra Costa Times never contacted me or anyone in my campaign. If they had, they would have "checked" something as well. I just returned home after 7 months as a refugee after Katrina, (which is clearly stated on my website). My campaign's weak FEC report for the first quarter is due to this inconvenient truth.
I would challenge, dare even, Ms. Vordenbrueggen to walk away from her home, worldly possessions (forever), with nothing but the clothes on her back, stay in a hotel for 7 months without working and see where she ends up.
Perhaps then she wouldn't be so contemptuous. (I'm giving her the benefit of the doubt on that one.)
"And by the way, Tallitsch added, McNerney has already signed on."
I said what? The Contra Costa Times never contacted me or my campaign as I have said. It would appear her "fact checking" is a mile wide but only an inch deep.
First of all, the book "The New American Compact: Restoring the People's House to America" is anything but "bombastic." I simply tell the truth. Apparently, the conventional wisdom thinks that's a bad idea. If one is to simply suggest `which one of these is not like the other' you're a radical.
Second of all, the book is not even available yet. Why would Vordenbrueggen go through all the trouble of talking about something she knows nothing about, nor does the general public, just to discredit someone who lives half a country away?
The simple answer is the conventional wisdom is seeing what I'm doing as a threat to the status quo.
To that, I can only say "good." The American people want change, not more of the same. Twenty-six candidates have signed on from all over the country and more sign on everyday to basic Democratic principles. The very principles the Beltway leadership has refused, or neglected to mention to voters.
Don't believe it? Ask anyone who's not a political junkie, "What does the Democratic Party stand for?" [Crickets chirping]
That is what "The New American Compact: Restoring the People's House to America" is attempting to address. People vote FOR something, not just vote AGAINST something. John Kerry has proven that fundamental truth, but the conventional wisdom still doesn't get it.
What's disturbing is that Ms. Vordenbrueggen likes to promote herself as unbiased, "fair and balanced" if you will. Yet, from her blithering it's easy to conclude she is neither.
However, this does pose an interesting question. Since we know that Lisa Vordenbrueggen doesn't do much in the area of fact checking, who is giving her information? Is she trading favors (or getting payola) from someone in the political arena to do a smear campaign?
It would appear Ms. Vordenbrueggen would be more upset about asking these questions than she would an underlining truth. This is proven by her massive generalizations of what is written in the book. Dare to compare and you've stepped way over the line.
I would consider a person who does NOT take history's lessons with sobriety to suffer from a serious malfunction.
However, it may just be that she's not read the book and is making general accusations about a subject she knows nothing about. It's believable, considering her aversion to check the facts. What's shocking is she's the Contra Costa Times "Political Editor."