Because I want a Republican governor, I have tried to only stress the positive things about my chosen candidate, and have refrained from tearing down either of the others on my radio show, BrainstormNW column, this blog, and other public utterances.
That said, I don't think it is out of bounds to point out when one candidate is stretching the truth so far as to make it unrecognizable, as was reported in the Oregonian today.
The story is about the kicker, and each candidate's position on whether to keep it or send it back to the taxpayers. I'm assuming that what the O reported is accurate here. If not, I am perfectly willing to stand corrected.
The Mannix campaign, according to the O, is telling people that Ron Saxton voted to keep the kicker.
Here is the actual text of the story:
On the Republican side, Kevin Mannix's campaign staff pilloried Ron Saxton for what they claim is an election-year turnaround, saying Saxton supported spending the kicker on schools when he was Portland School Board chairman but opposes the idea now.
"Saxton voted to have state government -- rather than taxpayers -- keep state tax 'kicker' refunds," according to a flier Mannix campaign workers hand out at events. As evidence, the flier cites a Nov. 22, 1999, Portland School Board resolution.
What the resolution actually supported was voluntary donations from parents who wanted their kicker refund check to go to schools. Saxton has never favored repeal of the kicker, said his campaign manager, Felix Schein.
That's about as misleading as it gets.
Look - I have no problem with Kevin Mannix criticising Ron Saxton's record. That is fair game, even if the 11th
Supporting voluntary contributions of the kicker returns is not the same thing as voting to keep the kicker. It isn't even close, and the Mannix camp knows it.
Mannix doesn't do himself any favors by making such obviously false claims. If he wants voters to trust him, he should stick to the truth.
So, I will say it first:
Knock it off, Kevin.
11 comments:
Thats the problem a lot of us Republicans have with Mannix. And he should be the last guy doing that, considering his poltical history.
Um, Rob? I think it's the 11th Commandment.... Thou shalt speak ill of no Republican.
Don, I don't think it violates the 11th Commandment to point out one Republican's lies about another's position.
I'd think you'd be more concerned about Mannix violating the 11th by lying than me violating it by pointing it out.
Rob, in your post you said "amendment" he is just correcting you.
Oh, now I get it. Thanks.... I've corrected it.
Mannix is such a slime ball.
I don't know why he thinks he can get away with this kind of stuff; it is so transparent.
Does he think voters are stupid? I've seen the same claim about Saxton supporting keeping the kicker on NW Republican blog. Is the Mannix camp feeding the stuff to them?
I haven't decided yet between Saxton and Atkinson, but I know I won't vote for Mannix. I voted for him last time, but never again.
I don't trust him. He has earned my distrust, unfortunately.
Harry Doyle said...
I wanted to comment on Kevin M's appearance before the OEA Saturday night. I still remember Kevin and his support for a Sales Tax last time around along with his conversation with Peter Courtney. This time he couldn't stand up and say what Ron Saxton told the assembled group--that PERS was bankrupting the State. Instead, he tried to be buddy buddy with a group who has no intention of supporting him or Ron. Kevin is still sounding like a Demo.
Fiscally conservative candidates don't support lightrail. Fiscally conservative candidates don't support tax increases. Fiscally conservative candidates don't endorse Charlie Hales (Mr. TIF financing himself), and most of all fiscally conservative candidates don't coast from "capital gains reform" ot "eliminate capital gains tax" just because it gets good applause.
Saxton is what his poll numbers tell him to be and what endorsements he can gain. He's just as likely to raise hidden nickle and dime taxes as Kulongoski.
Lets see Saxton agree to uphold the government income cap coming out on this years ballot. My bet is he snakes out of commitment and then comes out against it IF (big f#$%$ing if) he is the Republican nominee.
Give it a rest, Anon.
I'd have supported Hales too, given the candidate running against him.
Rob, thanks for framing the issue correctly. NW Republican has also made the correction and distinction between the myth and the reality to his credit. I too think that people should have the choice (freedom) to spend their kicker check any way they want, even if that means unwisely giving it to the most wasteful school system in the state. This is the same as my defense of the first amendment for those who have the freedom to say outrageous things in campaigns or even outright lies as much as I disagree and abhor their tactics. My hope is that Kevin will recognize the error of pursuing this tactic the same as he has backed away from trying to tar Ron with the Goldschmidt issue, which is a liability for Kevin also.
Yes, we do have three great candidates from which to choose as Republicans and I will support whomever is our party's nominee to replace Ted. My only desire is that we have a spirited debate on the ideas of the candidates and that we don't destroy our unity of purpose in the process. As to Ben Westlund, if he is looking good to anyone, then I urge to vote for him please, as it only elects a Republican to the center office.
KXL Kool Aid Boy
Ben Westlund presents a more inviting alternative for Democratics than for any voter who is actually conservative. Bring it on, Ben. Thanks for running.
Post a Comment