Thursday, September 25, 2008

Maybe Bill Lee Should Suspend his Campaign

Maybe Bill Lee should take advice from John McCain and consider not campaigning himself. The News Journal reports that state GOP chairman Tom Ross tried to take a shot at Jack Markell yesterday by citing an old shareholders' lawsuit against Nextel. Why the Lee campaign would imagine that reminding the public that Jack Markell was a successful businessman is beyond me. The suit was dismissed as lacking merit:
Markell has denied any wrongdoing related to Nextel, and indeed the 1995 class-action suit filed against Nextel in federal court in New Jersey was dismissed a year later by U.S. District Judge Alfred M. Wolin, who rejected claims of insider trading.
Jack Markell reacted sharply:
"When a judge looked at these charges, he threw them out of court," Markell said Wednesday. "When the Republicans looked at them, they threw mud."
Bill Lee tried to distance himself from the mudslinging, but Markell would have none of it:
Markell saw no distance between Ross and Lee.
"The judge who is not running for office dismissed these charges," Markell said. "The former judge who is running for office is behind these attacks and should be dismissed as well."
As I said about John McCain, if campaigning isn't working, try not campaigning. Maybe Bill Lee should find a reason to suspend his campaign and return to retirement with his 40 percent of the vote and his good name unsullied by sleazy tactics.

10 Comments:

Blogger Shirley Vandever said...

I read the article this morning and agree that it is a low blow by Ross. It's like he is throwing something out there, trying to get something to "stick".

It seems to me that Lee had a reasoned response and that it is stretch to assume that he is "behind these attacks".

All in all, though, not a good move on the GOP's part IMHO. Looks desperate.

10:40 AM, September 25, 2008  
Blogger TommyWonk said...

If Lee is not "behind the attacks," he is not in control of his party. The story noted he was reading the Nextel case, suggests that Lee thought the case might be relevant more than a decade later.

If there is a presumption of innocence in our system, there surely should be a presumption that a case was properly dismissed by the judge at the time. That being the case, I see no plausible reason for it to be brought up years later by a political campaign.

I may have been off in suggesting Lee should be content with his 40 percent in light of two polls released today. Fairleigh Dickinson University’s PublicMind has him down 61 to 27. SurveyUSA has him down 64 to 29. If Bill Lee is going to lose big, he should do so like a gentleman, and not let party hacks mar his reputation.

10:58 AM, September 25, 2008  
Blogger Jamie said...

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

5:23 PM, September 25, 2008  
Blogger Jamie said...

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

5:30 PM, September 25, 2008  
Blogger TommyWonk said...

The preceding comment was deleted because of an unseemly ethnic reference. The commenter suggested that the judge acted in the Nextel case acted because of the ethnic background of one of the parties to the suit.

5:34 PM, September 25, 2008  
Blogger TommyWonk said...

A second comment from the same reader, which involved further spurious ethnic references, has been removed.

5:38 PM, September 25, 2008  
Blogger Jamie said...

I think it's contemptible that you would consider the plight of the Palestinians spurious and unseemly. Nobody gives two shits about your pathetic little blog; 2 comments, wow a veritable groundswell--It seems you believe in Free Speech only for people you agree with. Why else would you remove my comments?

7:43 PM, September 25, 2008  
Blogger TommyWonk said...

I consider the fate of Palestinians to be a serious matter.

What I found unseemly, and deleted from my blog, is the suggestion that Delaware's next governor was given special treatment in court because of his ethnic background.

What I found spurious, and deleted, is the assertion that the situation of Palestinians is in any way related to this particular court case.

If you want to put forward your perspective on the Israeli-Palestinian issue or allege that Jews are given preferential treatment in court, you can use Blogger or any other free blogging software to present your views.

This is my blog, and I am within my rights to control the comments posted here.

8:02 PM, September 25, 2008  
Anonymous kavips said...

I'll give you two shits about this blog, and raise you one... Jamie..

If you can't run with the big boys, don't play.

They have kiddie blogs you know... where small minded people using slurs are more common....

2:40 AM, September 26, 2008  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I don't think Jamie is anti-semitic. Everything is related. The court case, the Palestinians, the jews...IRAN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

8:44 AM, September 26, 2008  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home