There has been a scandal brewing in Iowa because Hillary Clinton failed to tip a waitress, and then used the waitress' story as a struggling single mom in her campaign speeches. While some debate whether such an incident is relevant to a presidential campaign, I think it is. How a candidate treats the normal people who work around her -- the waitresses, hotel clerks, bellhops, and busboys -- is an indication of how much they really care about the working men and women of this country. If Sen. Clinton is really worried about the working poor, you think that she would be sure to leave a decent tip. The fact that the Senator used her name as an example of the type of working mother she wants to help, when she didn't even tip her, can be interpreted as evidence that she is more interested in using the plight of the working poor as a ticket to power, rather than actually being concerned about the plight of her constituents.
We should also look at how our local politicians treat the working people around them. In her investigation, the Barrister has uncovered some troubling evidence about how Peter Zavaletta has treated those employees who have worked for him in his law practice. For example, a few years ago he had promised his employees a Christmas bonus. Everyone had planned on receiving the promised bonus when they budgeting for gifts for the family, etc. As Christmas approached, Peter kept promising the bonus, but kept putting it off. Finally, on the last day before the Christmas holiday, all of his staff sat at work waiting for their long-promised bonus. They waited and waited, but Peter did not go in to work that day. Finally someone called him. It turned out that he took his family out of town for a vacation, and blew off paying Christmas bonuses. To me, this incident is a window into Peter's true character. He has enough money to pay a Christmas bonus, but simply did not value his employees enough to keep his promise. I think he will be the same as a politician. He talks a good game, but really just cares about gaining power and stroking his ego, and could not care less about the working men and women of this county.
Tuesday, November 13, 2007
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
11 comments:
That story doesn’t surprise me one bit. As a matter of fact if you would have told the story without using names I could have guessed it was peter. It has been said that he is the one that gives all St. Joe graduates a bad name in the eyes of non alumni. He is the living example of a pompous ass. The last thing this county needs is his arrogance in an office with power to ruin lives. I hope this county doesn’t make the same mistake the city of Brownsville did this year. I urge everyone to work hard to defeat peter and not assume that others know he’s all wrong for the job.
Interesting observations and I won't argue any of them. I don't know. However, I'd be more interested in his qualifications for running the office of District Attorney. Does he know a flip about criminal law and administration? He doesn't have to be a kind and caring soul to run a good office. Vindictive is entirely another matter in that position.
BB,
I would agree with all of your points.
You judge people by the way the carry themselves when they think no one is looking.
It exposes the true character.
Kurgan
This is what we, the public, have waited for 2 weeks? Disappointment is not just a song by The Church...
A more relevant question is how an attorney treats their clients. Villalobos was found GUILTY of misapplying a client's money, or in other words,stealing from them. That tells you all you need to know about Villalobos' character, or lack thereof. Villalobos is a petty, vindictive individual who is not worthy of being D.A.
For anecdotal evidence, there is a saying in Spanish "dime con quen andas y te digo quen eres", translation: "tell me who your friends are and I'll tell you who you are". Armandos' friends?
I bet you would never find any bad behavior in Villalobos' past? I'm sure he would never do anything to get his law license suspended. Pretty cheap blow to bring out the Christmas bonus story, but that shows me how scared Villalobos is to have to dig this deep, and that makes me very happy.
Actually, Villalobos was NOT ever even accused of taking client money. He was accused of using an account other than a trust account to handle client funds. That is a technical violation, but there was never an allegation that he took a cent of his client's money. He also was found to have directed a client to see another firm while employed by a firm. While this is also a technical violation, Villalobos had a reason. He found himself working for a firm that was settling Spanish-speaking clients' cases more cheaply than those of English speaking clients. He felt bad, and told her to see another firm. While this was a violation, it was a good faith mistake by a young attorney.
You should note that at the time of Villalobos' discipline he was still employed by Yolanda De Leon, who stood by him. It was also publicized in the last race, and after Villalobos beat De Leon, Zavaletta (who presumably read the paper and knew about the issue) actually wrote a letter to the editor praising Villalobos.
"BB,
I would agree with all of your points.
You judge people by the way the carry themselves when they think no one is looking.
It exposes the true character.
Kurgan"
We (myself included) write these comments under nom de plume and we question someone else's character?
BB,
Do you (the voters)really have to repeat Swift Boat and RatherGate again?
We as a people chose the most powerful person in the world based on what they did or did not do 30+ years ago.
We have all acknowledged that we could have done better, at least as an election process.
Why repeat those mistakes? Look at the posts, call for offsetting penalties and move on to what you have in front of you today.
I even understand you political leanings and you are open about that. Great.
But really, is that the best you have on Villalobos' opponent(s)?
Kurgan
Maybe the problem really is we need another candidate -
I have heard the law firm was Windle Turley's - if true - I can say this - Turley is politically protected
After the court of appeals found he transfered his clients property to the Dallas Diocese they voided the order upholding the transfer -
I do not know the facts surrounding Villalobos - but I do know this Turley is a major snake in the grass who has no problems cheating people
Do any coward anons want to step to the platter??
RUN FOR ANY POSITON, then we will talk................
Tanto pedo para cagar aguado (spanish for anons full of it).
Post a Comment