Re: Moscow School Board election

["John Danahy" <JDANAHY@turbonet.com>]

I have yet to see any real discussion of the issues facing the school
district either in print or on this site.  Instead, I have seen the various
supporters of the CQE attempt to run a single issue campaign based on one
candidate's religious affiliation.  This clearly seems to me a smoke screen
designed to hide from public view the other candidates support for status
quo in the district.
Why should anyone vote at all?

John Danahy
jdanahy@turbonet.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jack Porter" <jporter@moscow.com>
To: <vision2020@moscow.com>
Cc: <jackp@moscow.com>
Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2002 6:34 PM
Subject: Moscow School Board election


> There's one filing deadline to have your name printed on the ballot, and
> another deadline to have write-in votes counted.  This year they fell on
> April 19 and May 7.  So neither candidate is "illegal."
>
> I would be interested in hearing the write-in candidate explain why he
> didn't file by the first deadline.   Too disorganized?  Too
> uninformed?  Not a serious candidate?  Acting out a childish prank that he
> and his college buddies cooked up at the last moment?  Or is this a
> premeditated strategy to catch the public napping while his zealous
> supporters quietly get their voters to the polls?
>
> Jack Porter
>
> >X-From_: vision2020-request@moscow.com  Wed May 15 15:22:38 2002
> >Resent-Date: Wed, 15 May 2002 15:21:12 -0700 (PDT)
> >X-Authentication-Warning: whale2.fsr.net: slist set sender to
> >vision2020-request@moscow.com using -f
> >From: "Dale Courtney" <dmcourtn@moscow.com>
> >To: <vision2020@moscow.com>
> >Subject: RE: Moscow School Board election
> >Date: Wed, 15 May 2002 15:20:05 -0700
> >X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.3416
> >Importance: Normal
> >Resent-From: vision2020@moscow.com
> >X-Mailing-List: <vision2020@moscow.com> archive/latest/1463
> >X-Loop: vision2020@moscow.com
> >Resent-Sender: vision2020-request@moscow.com
> >X-postinispam-levels:     (C:64.7177 M:96.0930 P:94.8529 S:75.6322 )
> >
> >Ken wrote:
> >
> > > Third, one candidate is on the ballot and one is not.  I'm
> > > urging a vote for
> > > the candidate who filed his nominating petition before the
> > > deadline and is actively campaigning for the job -- Tim
> > > Kinkeade.
> >
> >If Beauchamp is on the ballet illegally, then this is a "no-brainer."
> >He's an illegal candidate, right?
> >
> >Dale
>
>