Thursday, October 18, 2007

Stewart Dominates Pandak In Debate

The second debate at tonight's Committee of 100 debate was between BOCS Chairman candidates, incumbent Chairman Corey Stewart and former County Attorney Sharon Pandak.

Stewart easily dominated his Democrat challenger. Pandak was shrill, inconsistent, and made elaborate claims unsupported by the evidence.

She started out on the offensive, attacking Stewart as "divisive," perhaps the whiniest and weakest charge one can make in politics. I guess Pandak missed the fact that most major votes on the Board since Stewart took over as Chairman have been unanimous. But why let the facts get in the way of a good, substanceless argument that Corey "doesn't work and play well with others"? What a crock!

Then there was Pandak's attack on Stewart's use of his "Supervisor's Discretionary Fund" to send an apolitical mailer informing all County households of the impending vote on the resolution regarding illegal immigrants. Pandak failed to note how other Supervisors have used their monies in the past, most to give the public's money to their favorite charities. She declined the invitation to expound on how she would limit the use of such funds or, better yet, do away with them entirely. I don't recall if he said it in the debate, but Corey noted that at least three people opposed to the initiative thanked him for sending the mailer.

Pandak also attacked Stewart by intimating that he was using his position as a stepping stone for higher office. It was unclear whether Pandak was angry because Stewart is much younger, has done so without laboring as a bureaucrat for decades, or because she didn't think of it years ago.

'Course, I don't remember her raising similar complaints when Chairman Sean Connaughton was trying to do the same thing.

The only enlightening moment came when Pandak --- according to some, for the very first time --- said that she opposed the unanimously-adopted initiative on illegal immigrants.

One can only hope that Corey gets the word out on an initiative supported by approximately 80-90% of County voters.


plain jane said...

Why, James, you and I definitely must have attended different debates, as it was obvious that Sharon was the clear winner. And speaking of whining, the first "whine" of the evening actually came from you, complaining about Democratic campaign staffers occupying the front tables at the event, which you seemed to deem the private domain of Committee of 100 members. I was under the impression that we (Committee) serve as the hosts of these events, not as honored guests.

As for Sharon's performance, she was cool, competent, and articulate. One of her best lines came in her concluding remarks when she clarified why she was running for Chairman - it is not a stepping stone to bigger and better things, clearly her publicity-grabbing opponent's intention. It is simply because Corey is Chairman and she sees a need to rid PWC of a bad apple. I couldn't agree with her more!

James Young said...

Well, Jane, if they were my staffers, I would instruct them to leave the good seats for people I actually hoped to persuade, rather than create some contrived impression of support.

That you call common courtesy "whining" speaks volumes about you. On the other hand, it's not surprising, given the level of dishonesty and sleaze in Democrat campaign rhetoric in this cycle.

And BTW, even assuming arguendo that Pandak's charge is true, why is ambition such a bad thing?

Oh, that's right: you Democrats despise success.

As for Pandak's performance, "cool, competent, and articulate"?!?! What color is the sky on your planet?

"Publicity-grabbing." Yeah, I suppose in your world view, doing the right thing would be "publicity-grabbing." After all, we see it so little from Dem pols.

But thanks for visiting!

James Young said...

And BTW, Jane, in so doing, then entered the room long before they were supposed to notwithstanding explicit instructions.

But I guess that's the Dem meme: call efforts to enforce the rules "whining."

Kurt said...

Cletis wants Christians to vote for Corey Stewart. Let’s examine Stewart’s judgement, character, and leadership.

Last February 24th I gently asked he remove his campaign sign still up, illegally, on the Dale Blvd ramp. It took him over seven weeks to get it removed. Stewart has yet to personally acknowledge it or apologize. Poor judgement and character, to me.

In March, Stewart threatened a County lawsuit against the State over transportation funding. In May he called it off, claiming he caused the General Assembly to take care of business. All the Delegates (R) I wrote replied his threat had nothing to do with their actions. Somebody’s lying. Also, turns out Stewart never discussed the plan with his fellow BOCS members.

His judgement and character in straying from the BOCS-approved position while testifying before a Congress on September 6th is questionable at best. There’s a trust issue there for Stewart’s BOCS teammates, as those of us with bosses who testify know well, and as Supervisor Nohe (R) indicated (September 16 Washington Post).

Proffer increases were his #1 campaign promise last year, with nothing done yet. He’s promising and pushing it again in this campaign season. A true politician’s judgement and character.

No matter your position on the illegal immigration resolution driven by Supervisors Stirrup and Covington, it will be interesting to see if Stewart treats any other $2.5M annual budget items so trivially with such political abandon as he did during the Chief’s September 18th BOCS presentation.

In December 2005 then-Supervisor Stewart cast the only vote against the IDI development, his anti-developer stance on the record. Yet on June 14, 2007 Chairman Stewart was smiling in the ground-breaking photo. You decide – hypocrisy, flip-flop, political correctness, or principled judgement?

I’ve lived in PWC for 23 years. Relationships within the BOCS, with the School Board, and across the community have never been more divisive as this past year under Stewart’s chairmanship, absent leadership.

The September 16th Washington Post stated “Stewart has never been shy about his ambition to higher elected office.” Given his repeatedly demonstrated, and documented, track record over just 10 short months, it’s obvious Stewart’s words and actions are much more about his political aspirations and less about the interests of PWC.

Forget religious and political party affiliations, and sensational campaign sound bites. Using my best judgement, I can’t vote for Corey, Cletis.