Wednesday, March 12, 2008

A good comment

I figured this comment merited front page exposure.
OK, I have tried to mostly stay out of this trench war fare regarding who lied. Patty says no one lied. She is wrong and frankly isn't qualified to say. She was not there! She can only accurately report what she has said.

The Tinklenberg Campaign is being deceitful and dishonest because they have been caught and they know it. I received a phone call from the Chair of SD13 yesterday, (Monday 10th) where he stated flatly that a surrogate for the Tinklenberg group, Don Schultz announced that Patty Wetterling had endorsed Elwyn. He was then questioned if he was sure? Was it support or endorse? It was endorse.

Paul, the chair courageously allowed me to quote him here. The Tinklenberg Campaign plays fast and loose with the truth. When questioned they cry foul! Negative campaigning! Then they use cute tricks by arguing what the meaning of is, IS. Finally they run a smear campaign against anyone associated with their opposition. How do I know? I am an unpaid volunteer for the Bob Olson Campaign. I was there at both conventions last weekend and heard what was claimed.

I was yelled at and accused of lying by Tinklenberg's staff at DFL Senate Candidate Mike Starr's house party the next day. I received abusive and threatening phone calls from those same people yesterday.

Enough is enough. My only crime is that I support Bob Olson. I'm not responsible for what anyone else says. I will be responsible for what I say here though.

The Tinklenberg Campaign has been dishonest in their endorsement claims and then more disturbingly dishonest in trying to cover it up. They have done it before. It is wrong no matter how you fluff it up.

Paul Wellstone said: "If we don't fight hard enough for the things we stand for, at some point we have to recognize that we don't really stand for them."

1 comment:

eric zaetsch said...

About that debate, you said meeting room, Anoka City Hall, 4 pm, Sunday, March 16.

Holds 250.

Is it still a go?

I would love to see Bob Olson say everyone at the bank branches has healthcare coverage, and challenge his opponent to disclose what's the status of the Tinklenberg Groupies. Covered or not?

And that website stuff Tinklenberg has up, about the plain folks vs. the CEOs who have their income spiral up and up while plain folks in the trenches watch and wonder.

Each is a CEO.

Which is fairer to the rank and file workers?

Olson has the problem of several branches and having to meet a budget, and meet a payroll. And he appears to have been doing that, growing the business prudently, for years and providing many Minnesota jobs.

Tink left MnDOT Oct. 2002, and formed Tinklenberg Group Nov. 2002.

What's it do in exchange for money? Olson prudently manages other peoples' money. Tink appears to take it and keep it, or spend some of it - with the how and where of it kept unclear.

What kind of arrangements do you think Tink fields? Employees or "independent contractors?" Do you suppose he runs that sham?

I would like to see that kind of bona fides tested; not see Tink take another shot at Molnau.

I know the bridge fell but I am a bit tired of the opportunistic tirade Tink spun - the reluctant Tink who had all those union boss ducks in a row but was not interested in running until the bridge fell.

I would hope the debate is ingenuous from both sides; disingenuousness left outside the door.

How do you figure the chances of that?

Do you think the Tinklenberg rain-on-the-parade rowdies who made asses of themselves at Mike Starr's fundraiser will show up at this debate to do the same thing?