One of Mr. Stark's constituents disagreed with his vote and sent him a fax telling him so. Within an hour after having received the fax Rep. Stark left this message on the constituent's voice mail:
"Dan, this is Congressman 'Pete' [sic--Fortney] Stark, and I just got your fax and you don't know what you're talking about. So if you care about enlisted people you wouldn't have voted for that thing, either. But probably somebody put you up to this, and I'm not sure who it was, but I doubt if you could spell half the words in the letter. Somebody wrote it for you so I don't pay much attention to it, but I'll call you back later and let you tell me more about why you think you're such a great G--damn hero and why you think that this general and the defense department who forced these poor enlisted (bitter laughter) guys to do what they should shouldn't be held to account. That's the issue. So if you want to stick it to a bunch of enlisted guys have your way, but if you want to get to the bottom of people who forced this awful program in...Iraq, then you should understand more about it than you obviously do. Thanks."
I certainly applaud Rep. Stark for being so in touch with his constituents but I'm not sure that a simple disagreement is any reason to make snarky comments about a person's literacy. Its not only unprofessional but its just plain rude.
Stark may have very good reasons for voting against the resolution in question, but don't you think it would be more productive if Stark had taken a few minutes of his schedule to explain those reasons? Is that too much to ask? It seems rather arrogant for a congressman to vote a certain way then ridicule a constituent who questions that vote.