Turn out stunk at the meet and greet the candidates (con't)

[bfrankdc]

No rule about who a candidate associates with, however that association is a reflection of the candidate, no?

 

According to Mr. Malson, Rees sent an email explaining his absence at last nights meeting as due to illness. Rees and "his surrogates" throughout the winter and as recently as this week, in response to the Ward 3 Democrats meeting, claimed that Rees was not going to attend. It was a premeditated action to NOT attend. Why then send a note to Mr. Malson claiming to be ill? Why not send him a note explaining that he simply does not believe his presence at such meetings will benefit his campaign, as he (and you) have explained here and on other internet forums?

 

In exposing Mr. Malson to that lie, it created the humorous, but incomfortable moment for the President of an Association that Rees has claimed has, or will, endorse his campaign.

 

I think such a lie in concert with the types of people Mr. Rees is associating with in aiding his campaign, speak volumes about Rees the candidate.

 

B. Frank

 

PS...why lock the threads. It is an obvious modus operndi of other Rees aliases, it certainly diminishes any concept you were protraying as not being Rees. It also makes following discussions harder for readers of these boards.

 

Is there a law or rule that says that a candidate cannot use people who may not agree with them?

 

What lie did Rees tell Malson?

[Gay]

I locked the thread only because I hate scrolling.

 

The fact that Rees might have said before he does not like debates is not proof that he lied to Malson. He could have in fact been out of town, sick or had another engagement.

 

Your assumptions are biased Bfrank. None of what you say holds water.

 

The well known David Gergen who worked for father Bush also worked for Clinton.

 

I would rather have a gay basher than a gay who can get the job done eventhough I might seem out of place.

 

 

No rule about who a candidate associates with, however that association is a reflection of the candidate, no?

 

According to Mr. Malson, Rees sent an email explaining his absence at last nights meeting as due to illness. Rees and \"his surrogates\" throughout the winter and as recently as this week, in response to the Ward 3 Democrats meeting, claimed that Rees was not going to attend. It was a premeditated action to NOT attend. Why then send a note to Mr. Malson claiming to be ill? Why not send him a note explaining that he simply does not believe his presence at such meetings will benefit his campaign, as he (and you) have explained here and on other internet forums?

 

In exposing Mr. Malson to that lie, it created the humorous, but incomfortable moment for the President of an Association that Rees has claimed has, or will, endorse his campaign.

 

I think such a lie in concert with the types of people Mr. Rees is associating with in aiding his campaign, speak volumes about Rees the candidate.

 

B. Frank

 

PS...why lock the threads. It is an obvious modus operndi of other Rees aliases, it certainly diminishes any concept you were protraying as not being Rees. It also makes following discussions harder for readers of these boards.

[bfrankdc]

Except that Rees and Rees "supporters" have been maintaining all along that the candidate would not be attending these events. As recently as THIS WEEK on THIS MESSAGE BOARD, this was the case. Why send a note to Malson that is a lie? It is a known lie.

 

Why not look at the facts since they are all here for everyone to see?

 

Malson calimed Rees emailed him and said he was sick. Rees has spent the last several months up to this week bashing public forums.

 

Facts are facts. If you want to defend a liar who hires gay bashers for his staff, all the power to you.

 

B. Frank

 

I locked the thread only because I hate scrolling.

 

The fact that Rees might have said before he does not like debates is not proof that he lied to Malson. He could have in fact been out of town, sick or had another engagement.

 

Your assumptions are biased Bfrank. None of what you say holds water.

 

[Gay]

As a gay man, I would rather hire a honest gay basher than a liar like yourself who obviously went out of his way to attend an event just to disrupt it and lie about it.

 

It is not a question of pro or anti gay but integrity which you Bfrank seem to have none of.

 

 

Except that Rees and Rees \"supporters\" have been maintaining all along that the candidate would not be attending these events. As recently as THIS WEEK on THIS MESSAGE BOARD, this was the case. Why send a note to Malson that is a lie? It is a known lie.

 

Why not look at the facts since they are all here for everyone to see?

 

Malson calimed Rees emailed him and said he was sick. Rees has spent the last several months up to this week bashing public forums.

 

Facts are facts. If you want to defend a liar who hires gay bashers for his staff, all the power to you.

 

B. Frank

[bfrankdc]

Attended the event because the topic was of interest. No disruptions of any sort. Plenty of people found the statement humorous.

 

Who said there were any disruptions? You didn't say anything about any disruptions in your initial post on the subject.

 

B. Frank

 

As a gay man, I would rather hire a honest gay basher than a liar like yourself who obviously went out of his way to attend an event just to disrupt it and lie about it.

 

It is not a question of pro or anti gay but integrity which you Bfrank seem to have none of.

[Gay]

I would consider any snickering when another is talking an outburst.

 

 

Attended the event because the topic was of interest. No disruiptions of any sort. Plenty of epople found the statement humorous.

 

Who said there were any disruptions? You didn\'t say anything about any disruptions in your initial post on the subject.

 

B. Frank