It has been brought to my attention that my name is listed on your web site
as an endorser of your candidacy for the District 3 City Council seat. In
addition, your web site lists the Oakland Black Caucus, which is a 501C6 and
legally cannot engage in endorsements as such.

For the life of me I cannot fathom how my name or the Oakland Black Caucus
found its way to your web site, but I demand that you remove it immediately
and issue an apology to the Oakland Black Caucus in general and Geoffrey
Pete in particular. For the record, I did not personally endorse in said
race and the Oakland Black Caucus PAC endorsed Greg Hodge for Oakland City
Council District 3.

Sincerely,

Geoffrey

Geoffrey Pete

Geoffrey’s Inner Circle

410 14th Street

Oakland, CA 94612

Um, wow. Way to split hairs on my last post… I’m not sure what “rhetoric” you’re referring to. You seem quite eager to jump to conclusions about what kind of views and positions people hold from a single post.

Didn’t mean to slam Greg before, I was just pointing out two equally absurd statements. If Sean’s work at Covenant House wasn’t enough service for you to determine whether to support him, then go find out more about him until you’re satisfied. To claim that as a reason to oppose him is as silly as laying the blame for OUSD’s current problems solely at the feet of Greg Hodge.

And really, wouldn’t your cause be served better by trying to convince people to vote for Greg rather than berate them in a highhanded, imperious fashion? It seems somewhat self-indulgent and more than a little counterproductive. Pointing out inconsistencies while cordially encouraging people to reconsider their held positions = good. Treating people like a bunch of drunk 5 year olds trying to burn down your house = bad.

I looked at the Globe’s published endorsements and when I didn’t see an endorsement in District 3 City Council. So, I actually did call them today to ask whether they had made an endorsement in that race or not. I was told no. I don’t know why you claim the paper’s endorsement for Greg Hodge, especially when Hodge doesn’t actually claim it on his own website.

I find it highly ironic that you would criticize dto510′s well-argued and well-researched post for “untruthful statements,” which you can’t show any evidence for, while at the same time insisting on fabricating an endorsement for Hodge that simply doesn’t exist.

While I disagree with your at-large endorsement, I respect your opinion. I hope that your predictions for the run-off are correct and hope that when that happens, you’ll learn more about Rebecca Kaplan and see that she’ll be a committed leader for Oakland who has a wealth of fresh ideas for improving the city.

I especially enjoyed reading your endorsements in District 1, the school board, and the Senate, as I’m still somehow undecided in all of those.

However, I felt like I was in an alternate universe when I read your endorsement of Chan. I could understand why you would endorse her, but I think her mailers are not a reason why. In fact, I thought she put out some of the worst, most disingenuous mailers of the campaign season. I was leaning towards Chan before I received those pseudo-endorsement mailers, but now I’m incredibly frustrated with her.

My intent is hold DTO accountable for the untruthful, incomplete, error-ridden statements he made. The golden standard is a personal one to be impeccable with your word, regardless of whether it’s the highest levels of journalism, or the lowest walks of life itself. I slam him for being sloppy in his writing, and condemning Hodge out of ignorance, not what you described.

And I stated that developing a youth center is not ADEQUATE experience to ASSESS a candidate’s ability to transform an entire city. I need more to be convinced. Perhaps that’s all you need. You called it the “right kind.” I didn’t use that rhetoric. Correct yourself.

You should not assume that one man is responsible for the errors and dysfunction that preceded him. I hope you and DTO enjoy your vacation in myopia lol.

You continue to condemn the very things you are ignorant about. Have you not learned anything from the commentary of this post?

Greg was endorsed by everyone that was listed. It’s on his website as well. Since the day I stepped onto the campaign, Greg has not been dishonest about any aspect of the campaign. He would not lie about his endorsements or supporters. Sean on the other hand…I’ve heard some interesting things. The Globe did endorse Greg, as did everyone else listed. I will repeat that you should go to Greg’s website and check their facts about endorsements. ACORN gave a dual endorsement to Greg and Nancy, giving it to them and not Sean because they feel that Greg and Nancy are the stronger competition.

My comment was so looooong because I’m thorough, a characteristic you’ve clearly proven to lack. You don’t see Hodge’s endorsement on the Globe site. Did you call the paper? Did you look on Greg’s site? You give up your search too quickly, and thus you come to incorrect conclusions. That is the essence of being near-sighted.

I attack you and your reasoning because they are one in the same. They are not mutually exclusive. Your reasoning is impoverished. You made untruthful statements about the visibility of Hodge’s campaign. You also insinuated that the Hodge campaign is antithetical to the “well-organized, aggressive, positive” Sullivan campaign. You would do much better to provide a more objective contrast of the candidates.

A doctor can be hard working and still amputate the wrong limb. Due diligence does not equate to intelligence.

If you are not going to uphold your integrity to be honest and knowledgeable in your assessment, then its up to me to hold you accountable.

But since we’re feeling all pot-shotty right now: You say that Sean founding and running a youth center for homeless, at-risk youth isn’t the right kind of experience to run for city council. Should I then assume that presiding over the trainwreck known as OUSD are the appropriate chops?

In terms of Hodge’s visibility, well, I’ve never seen him campaigning anywhere but the Farmers’ Market, and I’ve never received a phone call or an email from him. I’ve seen only two Hodge signs (one banner near my apartment on a commercial building, one on a house in West Oakland when I was walking for Sean) and no mailers. He raised hardly any money and Nadel is spending her campaign parroting Sean’s talking points, not Hodge’s, so it’s clear who she thinks is the biggest threat.

Your comment is so looong and negative. Why do people attack me instead of my reasoning? Part of your comment is a response and part is blather. But here’s what’s important. You say:

Being “energetic” and “hands-on” are not the characteristics that we should focus on to properly assess a candidate’s ability to move us forward as a people. A balance of hindsight, insight, and precise foresight, as a result of authentic experience, critical thinking skills, acquired wisdom, and comprehensive knowledge, are better points of comparison.

I couldn’t disagree more. D3 needs some who will work hard to deliver real improvements for the community, not someone who can talk a good game. The incumbent offers neither of these traits, so I guess we’re in agreement there.