The STARK reality

One California congresscritter may have a short temper, but he has a far longer attention span. Rep. P. Stark, (D-CA) has that enviable way with words that most people dream about.

You know. A petty public servant says you need Form B (which she waves in your face) but then she informs you that you can only get it through a written application, and by the way it takes 14 days, and your form is due tomorrow. And NO, she won’t copy it one for you now. Then, she goes back to her cell phone.

You silently seethe. You search for words. And like 94.7% of humanity, you swallow tongue, thank her, and leave, all the while wishing that you had said something else. But for the fact that you were at a loss for words AND too nice to say it in the terms that you are now thinking.

But, DAMN, on your drive back home, you REALLY remember thinking about the piece of your mind that you REALLY wanted to give her. Ahhhh, sweet, but late, comfort.

Rep. Stark has no such inhibition. He sees a problem, he says something. A Stark Congresscritter, as it were.

Last week, this California CC said some accurate and important things about President Bush, comparing the GOP stance on kiddie care unfavorably with getting their heads blown away for Bush’s pleasure. According to CNN, 87% of the public agreed with Stark, or at least his right to say it as one of the 435 most powerful people inside the beltway.

What happened next was predictable. The GOP (those few dregs of society still trying to keep their seats, despite FISA, SCHIP, IRAQ, IRAN, etc) went into attack mode. Ignoring much worse statements from their own members, and most of Talk Radio, they accused Stark of crossing some line. Their sole goal was to distract the media and America from their votes, AND from the quagmire we know as IraqNam. Of course, with the help of our new and improved MSM, they succeeded to some extent.

The GOP’s lockstep approach is worthy of applause. Not even the Rockettes kick up a storm with such great synchronicity.

I guess if you call a spade a spade, the GOP wants you to bid a club instead, or better yet, pass and let them claim the whole hand.

What was also predictable was the response of the Democratic leadershi* in Congress. If you can call it that.

How can anyone regret a congresscritter telling the truth to power? I guess Pelosi has a different idea of what upholding the constitution entails. If only the democrats had leaders like Newt, and Tom, and even Dennie, who said took an advantage and forced it down the opposition’s throat. I guess their corporate sponsors are far more important to Nancy and the DLC than America’s future.

Too bad. So sad.


  1. Jim C

    Seal , Ya know , I do believe we’re moving in the direction of a workable plan . So how about this . Have them present their perposials in writing for consideration . The congressional staffs could then go over them , assess their value and if said preposials would benifit the public interest . If deemed worthy of consideration the lobbyest would then draw up a presentation and be given an appointment to plead his case with his congressman which would be monitered and transcribed by a neutral observer . If accepted for consideration it could then be presentedd before the entire body to be considered and voted on . With this system a citizen or a lobbyest could plead their case with equal weight . Everything would be open and on record . If security was an issue appropriate measures could be taken . You would also have a record of the entire process .

  2. SEAL

    Having all lobby proposals presented in full session would tie up the house and senate way too much. My vision has always been that lobbyists and the companies they represent cannot make donations. I see lobbist the same as the representative for some business enterprise making a pitch to another buisness.

    They should make an appointment (and those should be screened) with whatever committee would oversee the pertinent area and come before them with a presentation. Committee meetings are always recorded.

    If the committee thinks the proposal has merit, they would present it to the full house or senate with the representative/lobbyist there to answer questions. Then it could be voted on.

    Of course I see this working with public funding for political campaigns. If we don’t do that, the system will always be corrupt.

  3. Jim C

    Helen , That would be great , make them stand up on the house floor and state their case . That way it could be arranged so citizens could also get a hearing . The problems arise when these things are done in secret , it’s simply a recipe for corruption . I’m sure the arguement would be the need for ( unvarnished ) advice . To which I would reply , their palms have been polished a bit to much already . They may also state the need for occasionlly discussinng things in private because of national security . OK , then let them plead in a closed session , but have a transcript . This secretive nonsense has to stop . A free democratic country simply can’t survive like this .