Video: Romero claims degrees he doesn't have The Local Dish, posted by Editor, The Almanac Online, on May 26, 2012 at 11:03 am
Election 2012: A few seconds from a video of a candidates forum in the 2008 election for City Council in East Palo Alto shows then-candidate Carlos Romero, now a candidate in the June 5 election for San Mateo County supervisor, saying that he has degrees from Stanford and Harvard that he does not have.
Read the full story here Web Link posted Saturday, May 26, 2012, 9:17 AM
Posted by academic credentials, a resident of another community, on May 26, 2012 at 11:03 am
Carlos Romero in 2012 at PenTV
"It is true, I'm an economic developer, affordable housing development specialist, who has both the academic credentials from both Stanford and Harvard as well as the legislative experience being the former Mayor, last year, of East Palo Alto"
Seek to exactly 5 minutes into this video: Web Link
Posted by County Voter, a resident of another community, on May 26, 2012 at 2:48 pm
Much ado about nothing. Mr. Romero - please keep on keeping on. The county needs your experience, expertise, vitality, smarts and tenacity, whether you went to Golden Gate University, Stanford or Menlo College. What counts is how you've used your education and other skills to improve life in your area. That you've done and can do in this county.
Posted by County Voter , a resident of another community, on May 26, 2012 at 3:10 pm
That was my point, Staford Grad - I was pointing to what I, as a voter, look for more with candidates - not necessarily where they went to school, but what they've done with their education, experience and other skills in serving their communities. I'm not saying education doesn't matter, either - it depends on the candidate and the office. I suspect that this kerfuffle hasn't risen organically, but has been done on purpose.
Posted by Menlo Voter, a resident of the Menlo Park: other neighborhood, on May 26, 2012 at 3:19 pm
Everyone knows when somone is a Stanford grad. They'll tell you in the first two minutes of conversation. The Stanford grads I know tell me that it's hard to get in, but easy to get out with a degree. Doesn't mean you know diddly or can do diddly. It just means you know a lot of other Stanford grads that can help pave your way in life. Those of us that went to lesser Universities generally had to actually work our way through life. Like county voter, I'm more interested in what Mr. Romero has actually learned and what he has actually done with that education as opposed to where it came from.
Posted by 2008, a resident of the Menlo Park: other neighborhood, on May 26, 2012 at 6:39 pm
Romero better win this Supervisor race, because he won his Council seat by only a small margin in 2008, while lying to the voters. People trying to divert attention to Keith graduating from Golden Gate look foolish. She also graduated from UCSB and passed the California Bar. Roomer mislead and lied to the public. His supporters need to embrace the reality of the situation. But they probably won't because their pride won't let them.
Posted by County Voter, a resident of another community, on May 26, 2012 at 7:20 pm
Clearly, someone in the camp of another candidate is stirring the pot and THEY look ridiculous - no matter where they went to school. Hey, I know some smart people who went to GGU! And hey, I'm just sayin' - again - that to me, it doesn't matter where the candidates received their educations, it's how they use their education when serving the public. Apparently, that matters to at least one other commenter here. However, whoever is behind this kerfuffle can't let it go and that is suspicious.
So many voters in East Palo Alto are very familiar with Mr. Romero and that he left Stanford to work on the city's incorporation. It's not a big city and when people do community work for years, they meet thousands of people and word gets out about them. He didn't rush into local politics at the city level nor does he play dirty pool. He's done a good job taking care of city and county business and is a viable, thoughtful and dynamic candidate. I respect Stogner's prediction but that doesn't take away from the viability of any of the candidates - if they're viable, although Stogner's realistic about their electability.
I hope that whoever wins takes care of county business as it best serves the residents, not merely forwards the new Supervisor's personal ambitions.
Posted by 2008, a resident of the Menlo Park: other neighborhood, on May 26, 2012 at 8:20 pm
If so many people in East Palo Alto knew that Romero didn't have a degree, when he was lying to the voters in 2008, why did Romero feel the need to lie in the East Palo Alto election at all? How is it stirring the pot or suspicious to hold a politician accountable for their lies to the public? Why would Romero need to leave school to work on East Palo Alto's incorporation? How do we know what Romero really accomplished or what he is simply taking credit for in this election? Are we supposed to take him at his word now that he is running for office again?
Posted by County Voter , a resident of another community, on May 26, 2012 at 8:33 pm
Grow up, 2008. You clearly know that you're raising a kerfuffle. You should take some of your excess energy and seek out the answers to your questions if you truly believe they're crucial questions. Call up the candidate and ask, or send him an email.
Your questions show disingenuousness as well as ignorance about East Palo Alto's history and incorporation process. I know what Romero has accomplished because I pay attention. Who is your favorite candidate and what have they accomplished? Let us know so that we can review our decision on who we're voting for instead of becoming bored with your tempest in a teapot.
Yes, it's suspicious to be reiterating as you are. Sure, hold him accountable - whatever you mean by that. He has already addressed the issue but you are pressing for something that remains unarticulated. Come on, spill it - what do you want that candidate to do?
Posted by Michael G. Stogner, a resident of another community, on May 26, 2012 at 8:38 pm
2008, What do you care, you are not voting for him anyway. I did I just don't think he'll be in the top 2, I hope I'm wrong. You still have 3 other candidates that just took an oath to fulfill a 4 year obligation I don't see you complaining about that.
Posted by academic credentials, a resident of another community, on May 26, 2012 at 8:42 pm
Michael, if only people with great influence can be elected, why have you yourself run in so many supervisor races? When you were a candidate, you talked about how you were viable.
In the last supervisor race, we thought Gina Papan was the one to beat. She had name recognition, and the endorsements of Leland Yee and Fiona Ma. She even had David Burruto, the Chair of the Democratic Central Committee, working on her campaign. You may recall that Gina came in 3rd. You may also recall that Shelly Masur came in 3rd when she ran for school board a few months ago. Dave Pine won that last race with cash, not influence. Right now, Slocum and Keith are sitting on the most cash.
Posted by 2008, a resident of the Menlo Park: other neighborhood, on May 26, 2012 at 8:56 pm
Have you really just resorted to calling names now? In the current election Romero has cited attending Stanford and Harvard numerous times. Everytime I saw anything about him, he referenced it. So often even this publication believed he had obtained degrees. As did I. Point me once to where he said publicly he didn't obtain a degree from either institution during this election. Even if people in EPA knew as you assert, the rest of the County did not. At best he has conducted himself in a misleading fashion. I was one of the voters who was mislead, and I am angry, and I don't appreciate being called names and being disparaged by his supporters. People in this election have already voted before the truth came out and he was forced to confront the truth. Only then did he apologize. He should withdraw from the race.
Posted by voter, a resident of another community, on May 26, 2012 at 9:10 pm
in the end, this is all about having or buying name recognition. If the name "Slocum" is so strong, you would expect Warren's wife to do better at the polls. In her last election, Keith pulled more votes from a smaller district that Masur and Slocum.
Other than campaign mailers, Slocum and Masur have had no exposure. With the recent Facebook move and IPO, Keith has had her face and name on the front page of the Wall Street Journal and several local and national TV news outlets. You may have also noticed that Keith has a 48 foot wide billboard on 101. I'm not counting her out of this race.
Posted by Michael G. Stogner, a resident of another community, on May 26, 2012 at 9:11 pm
2008, I didn't call you any name.....check my post, now you bring up an entirely different idea that you want this candidate to withdraw his name. I respect that idea....I also voted without this information, I don't think it would have changed my vote because he still was the only candidate who is opposed to the new JAIL we can't afford. Lets be clear here I voted for him but I'm not a supporter of him and I never told anyone about my vote until tonight.
Posted by 2008, a resident of the Menlo Park: other neighborhood, on May 26, 2012 at 9:23 pm
I appreciate your thoughtfulness Mr. Stogner. All County voters were entitled to know the truth before casting their ballots. We shouldn't have to play, I wonder if I had known. Romero's misleading conduct in this election occurred after outright lies in Romero's last election. I don't care if he is a Saint or the Dalai Lama, the electoral process requires his respect and truthful conduct towards the voters. It's too late now for many who have cast ballots, and that is just wrong.
Posted by Michael G. Stogner, a resident of another community, on May 26, 2012 at 9:24 pm
academic credentials said,
"Michael, if only people with great influence can be elected, why have you yourself run in so many supervisor races? When you were a candidate, you talked about how you were viable."
Thank you for that question, I offered the voters a different option, I refused to accept any endorsements from unions or organizations and as the voters started to learn about me and how I would vote on issues my vote count grew each time. Somehow Shelly and Bill determined that I was the enemy and told their 70,000 members and spouses that I was a Union Buster and Community Wrecker they went one step further and said vote No on Michael Stogner the COPE that paid for that mailer received approx. $23,000 from DMB of Arizona. As long as we have at-large elections and only about 110,000 people vote, those 2 will impact the results....Just my opinion
Posted by County Voter, a resident of another community, on May 26, 2012 at 9:53 pm
He didn't claim, in this video, to have degrees from either institution: Web Link. Again, it's your kefuffle.
His website, smartvoter.org, the articles cited on his website - none of them state that he has degrees from either university. Again, it's your tempest in a teapot and I shouldn't have to - and won't - do your research for you.
You are responsible for your interpretation of the meaning of "credentials".
From Meriam-Webster, for credentials:
- A qualification, achievement, personal quality, etc., used to indicate suitability for something: "academic credentials".
- A document or certificate proving a person's identity or qualifications.
As for name calling, I haven't done that. I'm truly baffled by your obsession with making a mountain out of a molehill. It sounds to me like you're taking this candidate's mistake from four years ago personally. I encourage you, in all seriousness, to call or email him and discuss your concerns. If you voted for him and are this upset, he should know about it.
You're being "disparaged" because your dog doesn't hunt, as they say. I've called you on your obsession with this and now your strategy is to play victim. If you didn't vote for him/aren't going to vote for him, then who gets your vote? See, I'm not convinced that this isn't a last minute strategy coming from one of the other camps. If it's not coming form one of the other camps, then be a responsible citizen and go to the candidate with your questions and concerns.
Posted by County Voter , a resident of another community, on May 26, 2012 at 10:35 pm
I wasn't part of anything misleading, and you know it. There is no strategy on my part, nor am I part of his campaign. I am an East Palo Alto resident and have spent the majority of my life in this county.
You reached your conclusions and I reached mine. But I've outed you and now you've changed your strategy from crying victim to attacking me. Ah, yes, the best defense is a good offense. You need to stop.
Other than that, if you're not really behind this tempest in a teapot/kerfuffle/mountain out of a molehill on behalf of another candidate, then you need to contact Romero about your concerns because you consider this to be of tantamount importance. I don't, so it's on you to handle your upset. I wish you the best of luck.
Posted by County Voter, a resident of another community, on May 26, 2012 at 11:21 pm
2008, I'm sure you can wield an online dictionary as well as anyone. Before you run away to hide behind whichever candidate you're working for, note that you started this. Perhaps this molehill is your mountain, I can't really say - but that's my best guess since you obviously play so small. But as I said before, the best of luck to you in wrangling with your upset.
Posted by 2008, a resident of the Menlo Park: other neighborhood, on May 27, 2012 at 4:11 am
Once again, I am an angry voter who got duped and who can't stand it when politicians and the people they work with for play games with the truth. You say I am playing victim for me and voters, but it's you is trying to make Romero out to be the victim of other candidate camps. Like somehow they made him lie and mislead. That's pathetic.
Posted by 2008, a resident of the Menlo Park: other neighborhood, on May 27, 2012 at 9:48 am
Yeah cause as a voter I should have to look for the fine print and the asterisks. But there were none. But it's my fault for believing in the system I guess. I guess the Almanac has the same reading and comprehension problems I do. They were similarly tricked. Do East Palo Alto voters have hearing problems as well? Just keep attacking me you Romero supporters.
Posted by Menlo Voter, a resident of the Menlo Park: other neighborhood, on May 27, 2012 at 2:42 pm
"Yeah cause as a voter I should have to look for the fine print and the asterisks."
Yes 2008 you should. Unless you're 18 and this is your first election you should know to look for the fine print and the astrisks. You also need to read between the lines and be very careful about what politicians say and what they do and have done.
Posted by Really???, a resident of the Menlo Park: other neighborhood, on May 27, 2012 at 9:14 pm
[Portions removed. Avoid general personal attacks.]
Kirsten Keith ... [portion removed.] For her to claim "credit" for bringing FB to Manlo Park is misleading! The process to work with FB started LONG before Keith was on the MPCC! She's just lucky that she's mayor now, and even that is questionable, given the brouhaha surrounding her becoming vice mayor. Maybe, someone should look into that situation a little more to see if she violated the Brown Act or not. [Portion removed.]
As for cash on hand, I doubt she and Slocum have the most cash. I hear that much of her campaign is self-financed because she hasn't been able to raise money. [Portions removed.]
Posted by voter, a resident of another community, on May 27, 2012 at 11:55 pm
Regarding all the venom toward Keith. We can't figure our what Really??? is ranting about. We do recall that there was a comment in an in post by Hank Lawrence, that ended with some reference to a vandalized campaign sign (Web Link), then Keith's campaign sign was vandalized (Web Link).
Regardling Kiraly, she has endorsed Masur (Web Link) and Romero (Web Link). Both Masur and Romero can be seen attacking Keith for her support of Measure L, in a PenTV segment (Web Link) she posted. Apparently, Romero and Masur don't trust the voters, they only want the elected officials involved in negotiating employee benefits.