Solomon, Lawson, that other candidate, and what Obfuscation can do to your credibility…

So, Who Is Stacey Lawson was Paul Andersen. http://staceylawson.info/

http://twitter.com/#!/pca67

Really wish he had the fortitude to be honest about it from day 1. Time will tell, but I suspect it’ll hurt his personal credibility working for/with future races because he decided to keep it a secret for more "bang". Someone forgot to tell Paul that in the new 21st Century reporting, transparency is also credibility.

I also am skeptical of the timing of his departure from that other lady’s campaign (left the day the staceylawson.info domain was purchased)… but what difference does it make? I’m having a hard time remembering her name – a non-candidate.

On balance: Lawson is a wacky spiritual freak who feels that being rich, intelligent and well-connected are enough to buy a campaign. And, sadly (it actually breaks my heart) her supporters all seem to be of the very same ilk. They’re wrong, and the only way that we’ll show them is at the voting booth.

Lastly: Negative mailers have been getting a lot of ink and talk lately. Norman Solomon is right about every word of his mailers… although he needs to fire his [fucking] AWFUL graphic designer – relying on photos of old ladies, pinocchio, Meg Whitman? Seriously… if it makes me think twice, I can only guess there’s a fence-sitting *exodus* of potential Solomon voters happening right now. But they aren’t jumping ship for Lawson (our mystic savior?) – they’ll be voting for Huffman – heir apparent. Disappointed, Norman. You need to make this right, ASAP, or Tuesday is the last day.

Signed,
Another Year, Another Lesser of all Evils kind of election.
~jake

Advertisements