Pellicciotti Lies by Omission

On Behalf of WEA’s More Conservative Members #68 Pellicciotti Lies by Omission 9.8.20 Mike Pellicciotti is not qualified to be State Treasurer. So, if you’re unqualified for the job, how do you build a campaign? By attacking the incumbent, of course. That was Tina Podlodowski’s plan when she ran against Sec. of State Kim Wyman in 2016. She’s now the Chairperson of the WA State Democratic Party. So, why are we surprised that unqualified Democrats are attacking incumbents. Unfortunately, Pellicciotti’s demonstrates his lack of training and experience in the accusations he’s making. For example, he’s attacking State Treasurer Duane Davidson for not attending investment meetings. However, pursuant to law, the Asst. Treasurer can and does attend those meetings. A point Pellicciotti’s carefully omits. It’s ironic, actually. Earlier, Pellicciotti implied State Treasurer Davidson was taking campaign contributions from the same companies he recommends for WA State investments. (Note: That turns out not to be true, either.) Now, he’s criticizing Davidson for not attending the meetings where he could have made such recommendations. Then there’s the fact that the decisions on where to invest are not made by the State Treasurer, but rather the investment board. Again, Pellicciotti seems to know very little about the job he is seeking. We need a trained financial leader in the office of State Treasurer. That’s why I support Duane Davidson, despite the fact WEA has failed to endorse him. Ken Mortland is a member of WEA-Retired, continuing a long career of activism in WEA/NEA. He is also a lifelong Republican and a member of Mainstream Republicans of WA Board.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Sec. of State Handles Calls for Help from Other States

On Behalf of WEA’s More Conservative Members #60 Examples of Sec. of State Wyman’s Media Appearances #3 - NBC - Coronavirus 'worst-case scenario': Could the presidential vote be done by mail? 3/26/2020 https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2020-election/coronavirus-worst-case-scenario-could-presidential-vote-be-done-mail-n1168151 8.24.20 This series is in response to WA State Democratic Party Chairperson’s claiming Sec. of State Kim Wyman has not been “championing vote by mail across the country” . •Wyman said she's been inundated with calls from colleagues in other states seeking advice. •"The first thing I say is people need to understand the context," she said. "I am probably the biggest champion of vote by mail in the country, but it took us five years to move from polling places to vote-by-mail." •Every state that isn't used to voting primarily by mail will have to prepare for a huge increase in volume. •Voters need to be told not only how to v
Read more

ARE THE ATTACKS ON USPS AN ATTACK ON THE CONSTITUTION?

SERIOUSLY! ARE YOU KIDDIN’ ME!! #10 ARE THE ATTACKS ON USPS AN ATTACK ON THE CONSTITUTION? Aren’t These People Supposed to Know Better? 8.26.20 -The US Postal Service was created by an enabling act in the US Constitution. (Article I, Section 8, Clause 7). -Under the Tenth Amendment to the US Constitution, election protocols are the responsibility of the States, subject to the US Constitution. (The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.) It is, therefore, my opinion that the recent actions taken by Pres. Trump’s recently appointed Postmaster General Louis DeJoy constitute a double assault on the US Constitution. Furthermore, the timing and targeting of mail sorting and delivery capabilities are clearly intended to disrupt the upcoming General Election and set the scene for a refusal by Pres. Trump to honor the results of the election, should he be defeated.
Read more

The Righteous US v. The Evil Them

Could This Be the Beginning of a Trend? #15 The Righteous US v. The Evil Them 7.8.20 There’s a great line, spoken by Ben Franklin, in the stage play/movie “1776”. I’m paraphrasing here, but it goes something like this…. “Revolution in the first person, our revolution, is always good. It’s only bad in the third person, their revolution.” As I look at the text of President Trump’s Mt. Rushmore speech, I see this concept in the form of an effort to emphasize an “US v. Them” scenario. On the Fourth of July, I would imagine a speech would emphasize the “WE”, but that does not seem to be the case. For example: "Our nation is witnessing a merciless campaign to wipe out our history, defame our heroes, erase our values, and indoctrinate our children." To start with, I’m struck by the scenario of “our nation”, not theirs; the “our history”, not theirs; “our heroes”, not theirs; “our values”, not theirs; and “our children”, not theirs. It implies “they” are not p
Read more