Pete ‘N Val Lied To Protect Brady’s Hide
From the Delaware State News, which just might have a worthy successor to Matt Bittle:
House Speaker Pete Schwartzkopf, D-Rehoboth Beach; Majority Leader Valerie Longhurst, D-Bear; and Majority Whip Larry Mitchell, D-Elsmere, also issued a joint statement Monday, in which the House leaders were supportive of the decisions outlined in Rep. Brady’s letter, noting that they come after “several very frank conversations with him these past few days.”
“We know that it cannot absolve his actions, but we hope it is a first step toward healing and addressing this situation,” the statement read.
“We want to be clear about something we have heard from residents this past week: As a duly elected official, only Rep. Brady can make a decision about his political future. House leadership cannot unilaterally take action,” it added.
That’s not true, however.
According to The Associated Press, Rep. Schwartzkopf, Rep. Longhurst and Rep. Mitchell are members of the House Ethics Committee, which is chaired by Rep. Longhurst and includes Republican Minority Leader Danny Short of Seaford and Minority Whip Tim Dukes of Laurel. House rules authorize the committee to investigate complaints that a lawmaker has violated the rules of legislative conduct.
Among the rules of legislative conduct: “A member shall not engage in conduct which the House determines (i) brings the House into disrepute or (ii) reflects adversely on the member’s fitness to hold legislative office.”
Committee rules state that any House member, including any member of the committee, can file a complaint. If a majority of the committee decides that the complaint has been proven, the committee can then, again by majority vote, recommend that the House take “appropriate action,” up to and including expulsion of the offending lawmaker.
No, I’m not gonna bother referencing the Rethugs’ calls for Brady to resign. Sen. David Lawson, to cite just one example, has repeatedly and publicly uttered offensive slurs towards ethnic and religious groups. So has Richard Collins. As always, R outrage is selective and manufactured.
Bottom line is this: ‘…any House member, including any member of the committee, can file a complaint.’ The Kop Kabal has made it clear it won’t be them. The Rethugs aren’t likely to do it as it could well lead to complaints against Steve Smyk and Richard Collins. Otherwise, they would have already filed one against Andria Bennett.
This silent ‘Delaware Way’ agreement is why complaints rarely get filed, and why Ethics Committee members get 6-figure salaries from the Police Athletic League. Filing such a complaint against Brady would also be a strike against the Delaware Way. But it wouldn’t be unprecedented. The Republican leadership decided that John Atkins had disgraced the institution, and they had him kicked out. You would have to think that some D’s with consciences would call out Brady’s behavior.
Who, if anybody, will have the guts?
Oh. Just one more thing: If you were one of the people from Brady’s district who called Peter and Val to ask why they haven’t taken action, it’s official: They lied to you. You, uh, might want to call them back.
Silly, inconvenient FACTS! Ask John Atkins what can be (and WAS) done:)?
Hey! I’m a member of Delaware Asian American Voice. We’re a newly formed grass roots group of advocates that have been busting our butts to make Gerald Brady resign. If you live in district 4 we might have knocked on your door. We would love to talk to you! Please reach out!
Hi Y,
I’m a registered D in RD 4. Reach out to me – edouglass09@gmail.com
Didn’t Speaker Pete Schwartzkopf also make some pretty racist comments last year? https://bluedelaware.com/2020/06/15/resign/
Yeah. Poor white cop WANTED that job. But they gave it to an undeserving black person.
Cue Jesse Helms:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KIyewCdXMzk
BTW, Pete’s mewlings tell you all you need to know about kop kulture in the Delaware State Police.
Wow.
That’s some straight talk from the Delaware State News. It is within spitting distance of “Pete is lying.”
Because he IS lying. He knows b/c his good buddy Atkins was kicked out of the General Assembly using the same procedures that the Kop Kabal has chosen NOT to employ on Brady.
It is one thing for us to note that Pete is flat out lying – but one of state’s newspapers coming out and saying it is a new development.
Brady may yet resign at some point. I assume leadership is taken by surprise and is still trying to figure out the best path forward (for them). The same is true for progressives.
Brady may be simply trying to preserve his income as long as possible. I don’t know anything about Brady’s profession or his net worth, but his legislative bio says he is Executive Director of the DE AFL-CIO, which is presumably his main income. Once he resigns, he is probably no longer useful to the AFL-CIO, and so will lose both his incomes. There may also be pension deadlines or severance issues giving Brady financial incentive not to resign.
Yeah. Typical cop behavior, playing the helpless victim.
C’mon, Johnny K! This is a perfect one for you. Expose PeteTheCop for the liar he is and help further punish this soggy pork rind.
I truly feel that white guys have a particular responsibility to smack down other white guys when they ….. do what they do. This is popular, on brand for you, and most importantly, the right thing to do.
Filing an Ethics Complaint is considered to be using the nuclear option.
Anybody opting to use it must first go through a mental ethical checklist.
Many legislators, including Kowalko (pushing legislation that benefits his wife’s day care business), don’t have a clean slate.
That’s why this is a Delaware Way thing. Few are willing to opt for Mutually Assured Destruction.
Meaning, what we need, among other things, is a more ethical group of legislators. We made some inroads in 2020. We need more.
El Somnambulo
I’ll only say this once. If you choose to be a little jealous toad, resentful of anyone’s accomplishments than I’d advise you to get your facts straight. My wife does not and has never owned a day care business. She is the Director of a “non-profit” day care in Newark. Her efforts to help the day care industry in Delaware by questioning/challenging over-regulation and bureaucratic excesses that can harm these “private” businesses and drive them out of existence is a part of her obligation as the chair of the “Provider Advisory Board” established/created by State law. Whatever your personal psychological burdens might be you have made a totally unfounded accusation that I have “pushed legislation that benefits his (my) wife’s day care business” This is a lie and you have no examples or proof of your allegations to support your lie so why don’t you man up and retract such unfounded and irresponsible remarks.
Representative John Kowalko
It takes someone with psychological burdens to pretend to know someone with psychological burdens. I mean, what’s THAT all about? I’m a happy guy.
Whether you regard your efforts as above-board, you have been deeply involved in legislation that impacts what your wife does for a living.
And, as you know, ‘not-for-profit’ doesn’t mean that somebody’s not profiting from it.
Yes or no?: Does your wife profit from her day care work? If the answer is yes, then you have no business actively legislating in that arena. That’s a conflict-of-interest.
If you hadn’t placed yourself on a pedestal as virtually the only pillar of integrity in Dover, then you would not have to answer for your actions which belie the image you have crafted for yourself.
If there’s a type I can’t stand, it’s the self-proclaimed ‘Last Political Virgin’. Bob Weiner was one. You’re another.
John, John? You say I can’t demonstrate any legislation on this matter where you and/or your wife have a conflict-of-interest.
Only had to go back to HB 337 from the 147th General Assembly, where you sponsored legislation strengthening the Board your wife serves on:
https://legis.delaware.gov/BillDetail?LegislationId=26398
Quinn Johnson, who also had a clear conflict-of-interest, went Not Voting. You SPONSORED the fucking bill.
So spare me your verbal histrionics. And your diagnostic quackery.
Honestly Som, even if he’s crooked as a Coons, I don’t care. Someone has to do something solid. This is why the dems be wiped out next year and trump will be president for life by 2025. They don’t fucking fight
Mr Kowalko, Sir, you’re either a fighter for progressive causes (anti racism being one of them) or you aren’t. I know you certainly seem to be, but now is the time to put up.
Quinn Johnson “OWNED” a group of day cares and had a legitimate conflict of interest. Even you should be aware of that. HB 337 does not “strengthen” the Board it simply spells out and clarifies the Board’s role. You are obviously devoid of any substantial knowledge of the day care industry and the laws that govern it. But I’ll leave you to your own “histrionics” and obvious personality deficiencies.
Representative John Kowalko
Allow me to quote from the synopsis of YOUR bill:
“This Act strengthens the role and responsibilities of the Provider Advisory Board in regard to the implementation and enforcement of The Delaware Child Care Act.”
Don’t you even bother to read your own bill before responding with misinformation?
You still haven’t answered my question: Yes or no?: Does your wife profit from her day care work?
If so, your sponsorship of, and voting on, day care legislation is a textbook conflict-of-interest.
Ok, Rep K. So you’re in the clear. So file the complaint, please. You’re best positioned to do it.
Ben’s right. Go ahead. DO it, John. Now that you’ve proclaimed yourself as above reproach. You’re ‘best positioned’ to do it.
Kowalko loves regulations but hates them when it hurts his wife’s business interests.
So has the Delaware State News overtaken TNJ as the paper of record when it comes to government and politics here?
They had far surpassed them during Matt Bittle’s time in Dover.
We’ll see if ANYONE deserves that praise now that Matt has left.
Is there a difference between resigning and not running that affects Brady’s retirement package/benefits, etc?
Good question. I BELIEVE that, if he’s expelled from the institution, he would lose his legislative pension.
If he resigns, all that he would lose would be whatever additional accrual to his pension would have taken place had he not resigned. He’s easily been down there long enough to command a hefty pension.
If he doesn’t resign but is not expelled, then he just retires at whatever his total is as of November of 2022.
El Som
No, my wife doesn’t profit from the day care. She receives a salary”FOR HER WORK” as any worker is entitled to. The day care is administered by a board of directors. You do know that recently you got all agitated with someone exposing your place of employment and protested that “outing” in an angry huff. So now you think it’s fair game to try to create some conspiracy theory by discussing my wife’s job? Your attitude is beneath contempt so why don’t you take your “hypocrisy hayride” to the “oblivion-express” you are obviously so anxious to board.
Representative John Kowalko
Hello? Is this mic on? My wife’s a pharmacist. Were I a legislator, which I’m not, I would not participate in any legislative discussion or legislation pertaining to pharmacy.
You’ve been very open about your wife’s day care work. You spoke of it at a PDD meeting I attended. I’m not outing her. And of course she’s entitled to get paid for her work.
The point is, she’s involved in that profession, AND she’s involved in making policy. That’s a conflict-of-interest. My source? You:
“My wife does not and has never owned a day care business. She is the Director of a “non-profit” day care in Newark. Her efforts to help the day care industry in Delaware by questioning/challenging over-regulation and bureaucratic excesses that can harm these “private” businesses and drive them out of existence is a part of her obligation as the chair of the “Provider Advisory Board” established/created by State law.’
You’ve made clear that you are carrying out legislation on behalf of your wife’s interests. Opposing ‘over-regulation and bureaucratic excesses’ sounds like a line out of the Chamber’s playbook. Or is day care the exception that proves the rule?
At this point, you’ve made clear that you have exempted yourself from such standards and that you will legislate regardless of these conflicts.
I have nothing more to add. Feel free to carry on in an unethical manner. It’s unfortunate that you have demonstrated that you are no better ethically than some of those you have castigated.
BTW, we’re way off topic here. You’re entitled to one more response, and then I’ll move this to the Open Thread.
Here you go buddy:
Worksheet for Conspiracy Creators:
1)Fabricate a scenario out of whole cloth.
2)Find a situation off topic to the discussion
3)Claim to have knowledge of matters that you know nothing about
4)Post it on a site that you control (self-trolling)
5)Ignore actual history and basic reality
6) Immerse oneself in a self-serving hypocrisy that is unhampered by the truth
7) Repeat the process over and over
8) “Eureka” another QAnon is born.
Rep. Kowalko
That, right there, is a non-answer answer.
We’re done with this portion of the thread.
John – why will you not file an ethics complaint? Why will you not request he be expelled?
Well, at least you’re focusing on the important issues, sir. *eye roll*
Have you filed the ethics complaint against your racist colleague yet?
I kinda hope this is not actually my representative and it’s just someone playing a troll account. …. can you imagine Bernie going on the Young Turks to trade barbs with Cenk? (Som, I respect you more than Cenk)
If we’re asking people to step down from positions of leadership for racial slurs then why has no one gone after James Maravelias? He’s gotten away with making some of the most hateful comments about other races and nationalities and has done so repeatedly and in public as if he is untouchable.
Maravelias was pressured into making a public apology, but keep in mind he does not hold a public position — unions are private organizations.
That is true but it’s still a powerful position with a whole lot of influence over legislators so I would have expected to see far more media coverage. I was disappointed that the only coverage I saw on it was on this site and maybe one news outlet.
He’s part of a union that literally can control an election. Are we really comfortable with that? We’re not talking one isolated comment, he makes them consistently.
To be fair, there isn’t much media left.
Each of the northern NCCo school districts has a budget of about a quarter billion dollars. Nobody is covering them that I’m aware of.
Also, what Rep. Brady said is inexcusable but it does not take away from his service to our country or his years of service to his community as a state legislator. How quickly you all forget the good that he has done for Delaware solely because of one comment that he has profusely apologized for making and more than paid the price for. I can only imagine the things that would be found on all of you if your lives were under the same microscope that legislators are. That couldn’t happen though since most of you hide behind fake screen names because you’re too afraid to put your name next to your hateful comments.
My name is Steve Tanzer. I think everybody reading this blog knows that. I’ve argued that Brady hasn’t done much good for Delaware, especially as a legislator.
There’s a fairly long treatise over on today’s open thread which outlines what I believe to be his strengths and weaknesses. He also deserves credit for his military service.
However, using a state server, he sent out one of the most reprehensible tweets I can remember, and he should be held accountable. If you’ve read this blog, you know that he isn’t the only person we’ve criticized over the years. And, I would emphasize, that we’ve been quick to praise when officials deserve praising.
Yes, it’s a blog. It’s our opinion. But I would argue that they are informed opinions, and I guess the (to me) surprising number of page views we continue to get reinforces that people at least like to read those opinions.. You, of course, have every right to respond with your informed opinions.
Which you have done.
I appreciate your diplomatic response and transparency. I would argue that being an elected official extends far beyond legislative duties. What we don’t see everyday is what our officials do for community members, how responsive they are, and whether they know the people in their district. It’s doing things like getting potholes filled, visiting constituents who need assistance, and attending community meetings. All of which I know Rep. Brady does exceptionally well and has done so throughout his career.
If his comment was truly a reflection of his beliefs, then we would have seen a pattern or at least heard of more instances of it. None of which we have. People make mistakes. No one is perfect, and although we should have high expectations for our legislators, we should not expect perfection. I, for one, would not want comments I made in privacy to be distributed for the world to see because at the end of the day, we all say things that we do not mean or things we don’t necessarily believe. It would be one thing if we tried to justify his words or make an excuse but he didn’t. He not only acknowledged how wrong it was and publicly apologized repeatedly but has also chosen to not seek reelection. Kicking a man when he is down is not noble, it’s hateful.
Darius Brown literally punched a woman in the face, behavior that disenfranchises and oppresses women all over the world, and no one sought his resignation outside of some far right Republicans. Yet there has been more outrage over Brady’s comment than a public display of violence towards a woman. Although words matter a lot, actions matter even more and I know that throughout his career, Rep. Brady has acted in a way that reflects service to his community.
His words reflect awful misconceptions and are a symptom of a problem, but his words are not the problem itself. Maybe more good would come from channelling the anger and engaging in efforts that work towards addressing this misconception and shedding light on the harm it can do. No good comes from throwing stones at people. But I digress. Thank you for your dialogue.
We have consistently called out Darius, including for things he did BEFORE the public violence. We’ve done the same with both Andria Bennett and Steven Smyk.
Of the four, only Darius has been disciplined by losing a committee chairmanship.
All deserve sanctioning. That’s a position I’ll continue to hold.
I’d like to make a point, though. There have clearly been IMO four serious transgressions that need to be addressed. Almost to a person, the ONLY one of the four that people seem to bring up is Darius. Andria Bennett beat up her husband, and the police covered it up for a week. Steve Smyk allegedly engaged in a pattern of harassment against female police officers.
I think all four of these incidents are serious, but almost all the fixation is on Darius. Gee, how is he different from the others?
Oh I agree, I brought up Darius because he’s also in the City of Wilmington and it was the first to come to mind. Again, the instances you mentioned are behaviors yet Rep. Brady’s words (that occurred on one occasion) have garnished more attention than all three of those combined.
He punched a woman in the face in public. The other incidents are alleged, and have no outside witnesses.
Does that help?
I also don’t remember him expressing any remorse or apologizing.
No Kowalko fan, but Mr. Elsom, you are off base. John K advocates for small daycares that operate on thin/no margin. Delaware’s kids need them and he fights for them. John is fighting for good policy in that space.
Wasn’t the point I was trying to make. It was about the possible Mutually Assured Destruction that could result from a complaint being filed:
“Filing an Ethics Complaint is considered to be using the nuclear option.
Anybody opting to use it must first go through a mental ethical checklist.
Many legislators, including Kowalko (pushing legislation that benefits his wife’s day care business), don’t have a clean slate.
That’s why this is a Delaware Way thing. Few are willing to opt for Mutually Assured Destruction.
Meaning, what we need, among other things, is a more ethical group of legislators. We made some inroads in 2020. We need more.”
Only reason I cited Kowalko as an example was b/c Ben had urged him to file the complaint. That’s what I responded to.
After all, the most ethically-challenged House member, by FAR, is Our PAL Val, who lied to constituents in the 4th RD in the first place. We also know her as the Executive Director of the Delaware Police Athletic League. She COULD and probably SHOULD file the complaint. But her own ethical bankruptcy forestalls her from doing it.
I was talking to someone last night who speculated the Kabal wants to keep Brady in place through the redistricting process.
El Som, would there be any value in Pete and Val having a reliable ally in that seat?
Yes, but it’s complicated. Leadership needs to do all it can to keep enough of the members, the D members anyway, happy just to guarantee the bill will pass.
One way to do it would be to get rid of the 4th RD altogether, perhaps move it downstate, and divvy up the district to keep other districts intact. It’s easier to do that with a lame duck who has no direct stake in the district’s future than with someone who has a stake in retaining the RD.
At this point, though, Brady’s behavior is entirely unpredictable. He has proven that, his aw-shucks demeanor aside, he will not hesitate to stab someone in the back. He’s proven that he’s not who he appears to be.
That’s about the best I can do.
Kowalko has a conflict of interest whether his wife owns the daycare or works for a daycare. He can delude himself with the idea that there is a difference between the two, but there is not. Making money by owning a business or working for a business creates the same conflict.
I noticed he didn’t address why he won’t file a complaint against any of the 3 representatives who have demonstrated their inner ugliness. His refusal to do so is all the more disturbing because he (and a couple of others) market themselves as fighting for the ordinary citizen. You’re either a people’s legislator or you’re not. Pick one.
The Delaware General Assembly has a long, long history of seating people with vested interests on committees that would further those interests. It has traditionally been defended because, say, putting farmers on the ag committee drew on their expertise in their fields of employment, doncha know. So I don’t think that’s at play here, simply because none of these legislators consider it wrongdoing in the first place.
El Som noted that nobody steps forward because nobody wants the spotlight on them. I think that holds true for … (checks notes) … 40 House members.
Interesting, though, that someone who’s never posted here before piles on Kowalko. I would think the people to pressure about this are the ones who sit on the ethics committee. Someone like, say, Val Longhurst, who’s certainly not shy about taking a lead role in slapping her name on every bill that comes down the chute and who, as a champion of women’s rights, should have extra motivation to step forward.
I wonder why she doesn’t?
Yeah and every corporate attorney who votes for or supports the Corporate Bar Commission yearly litany of (40 page) bills benefiting the Corporate Bar have a conflict of interest and every ex cop who votes on police reform has a conflict of interest. Every legislator who is or was a real estate agent or developer who votes on property taxes, development rules etc. has a conflict of interest. Every legislator who is a nurse or employed by a medical facility who votes on Health Care or Health care issues has a conflict of interest. Every legislator who is an insurance agent or works for an insurance agency who votes on regulations or laws in that industry has a conflict of interest. Every school employee (teacher or janitor) who votes on education issues has a conflict of interest. Every retiree and/or working person who votes on tax issues has a conflict of interest. Every Legislator whose spouse is an attorney, teacher, doctor, nurse, bank teller, lawyer, insurance agent, business owner, University employee etc. etc. etc. should recuse themselves from voting because they have a conflict of interest. Yeah, your right, the Delaware General Assembly should be limited to homeless, unemployed and unemployable members (unless they’re receiving subsidies or food stamps then they’re out). Furthermore “Dukeit” if you want to contact me personally (not anonymously on some blog site) I will address your questions to you personally. Please don’t “delude” yourself with the expectation that your anonymity has been somehow earned or deserved.
Representative John Kowalko
“Making money by owning a business or working for a business creates the same conflict.”
Would the same logic apply to union members? Because there are plenty of legislators who were dues-paying union members. So should they have recused themselves on labor issues?
Absolutely that logic applies
John Kowalko
It’s absolutely not the same logic. I thought we were through with this, but obviously not. Here is how John’s wife describes her own job responsibilities. I, of course, have removed her name and the name of the day care facility for which she works:
“Overall management of children’s nonprofit daycare center, including financial responsibilities- tuition invoices, banking, payroll, supplies and equipment. Client intake, hiring, public relations, curriculum and policy decisions, regulation compliance. Additional responsibilities include working with state officials and fellow providers on setting new early childhood regulations.”
Read that last sentence again. Now tell me: What other wife of a legislator gets her husband to sponsor bills that directly benefits her business? I know, I know, it’s not technically HER business, she has a Board to answer to, but as you see, she runs the place.
BTW, it’s a VOLUNTEER board. Except for her. Raising the question, to me at least, which came first, John’s wife, or the volunteer board?
And, I might add, she makes damn good money for running it.
It’s all there in the public record, just a few clicks away.
El Som said:
“Bottom line is he CAN’T do this precisely because he has a blatant conflict-of-interest” (Wrong again fella).
No! not “CAN”T but he “WON’T” do it just because some unimportant, and ill-informed blogger harboring delusions of being a player demands it.
You said, “which gets worse the more I look at it” is one of your more embarrassing statements.
If you are capable of reading and interpreting legislation, then you’d realize that none of the day-care and child-care bills that have been passed have given any advantage to day-cares or their employees. Every bill has been to try and level the playing field of the child-care industry against government agencies that choose to overregulate an industry that has been deemed as one of the most important to the health, welfare and safety of Delaware’s children. An industry that enables parents to be gainfully employed knowing that their children are well cared for and kept safe. An industry that the government has consistently failed to support financially so that day-care workers (who tend to our most precious asset—our children) can be paid a livable wage and provided with affordable health care. An INDUSTRY that the Governor of Delaware declared, sixteen months ago, must remain open at the beginning and throughout the entire pandemic even when SCHOOLS were closed down. An industry that if it had a tenth of the money, influence or lobbyists that pollute the halls of Dover like the Banking industry, the wealthiest Corporations the Health Care monopolies, the Fossil-fuel conglomerates and the Corporate Attorneys do would not have such hostile impositions placed upon them.
Legislation that enables these thousands of home-based and center-based facilities to “EXIST” as viable private businesses is not some kind of entitlement, advantage or gift. Until the government chooses to take over all aspects of early child care and education (AND PAY FOR IT) it should not and cannot impose destructive and unfair restrictions on this most necessary industry or risk driving it out of existence.
Read the bills Stevie and maybe have a lawyer help you and please identify and highlight all of passages that “directly benefits her business” (your claim) and then please go to the press and have “them look into it” “CLOCK’S TICKING”
Representative John Kowalko
John Kowalko wrote: ” Every bill has been to try and level the playing field of the child-care industry against government agencies that choose to overregulate an industry that has been deemed as one of the most important to the health, welfare and safety of Delaware’s children.
First, every industry claims they are overregulated. Take, for example, another industry deemed essential during the pandemic: the nursing home industry. Turns out they were not sufficiently regulated at all. Something I’ve been writing about seemingly forever.
To his credit, I cannot recall Rep. Kowalko ever railing against overregulation of any industry…
except the one that employs his wife. And except the one where his wife influences her husband to write legislation addressing said perceived overregulation.
All the insults in the world can’t change the fact that that is a textbook conflict-of interest.
Conflict-of-interest aside, John has no more obligation to file the complaint than any other representative. I don’t think it’s fair to hammer him on that.
I disagree. Anti racism and driving racism out of the party is a priority for the left wing of the party. Rep Kowalko in addition to representing his district, represents that wing. Furthermore, the onus is absolutely on us white men to do the hard work of punishing other white men for being awful rather than forcing that emotional labor on their victims. If he doesn’t wanna do it, fine. I assume there’s a reason. But he is absolutely the man to deliver the coup de Gras here. There should be nothing to lose.
Gotta say, Ben, you make a compelling case.
John? Floor’s yours. (Checks watch. 7:24 pm.)
Gotta say, that’s bullshit. You talk all the time about the reps who are more progressive than he. Where are they now?
Madinah made a statement. Others should take note.
The statement from House Rep Madinah Wilson-Anton
https://mobile.twitter.com/MadinahForDE/status/1420512778960445442
This is how you do it.
She’s already one of the best we have in Dover. We need to bring her some reinforcements in 2022.
Is it? Why hasn’t she filed an ethics complaint? Why is it up to John Kowalko, who according to El Som does NOT represent the progressive cause?
@Ben: If you don’t like it you can vote against him. Oh, wait.
Puttin’ words in my mouth. He claims to be a progressive, and he generally votes like one. Never argued his progressive bona fides, just this blatant conflict which he addresses by calling me a toad and a Q conspirator. Now he needs to be protected from answering this simple question?
Bottom line is he CAN’T do this precisely because he has a blatant conflict-of-interest which gets worse the more I look at it. Something I hadn’t intended to do until John goaded me into it.
He’s the instigator here, not the victim. This conflict is so blatant that I think the press should look into it.
Honestly fuck it. If he tries to take out Gerald Bunker, and someone brings up the fact he tried to help a daycare, I’ll defend him. I’m have influenced but I can still vote for him and urge my neighbors to do the same. Maybe his wife is great at her job and it’s a small damn state. Who cares? We’re hunting racists
It’s more important that we flush this turd. Do it John. It’ll be fun.
Sorry, didn’t realize the fine distinction.
Point remains: None of the progressive wing has done what some are demanding Kowalko do. Explain that at your leisure.
I already did…. pretty clearly actually. Way more articulate than I usually am.
Sorry, that was directed to El Som. My bad.
You’re right. That was just a quick reaction to Kowalko’s latest stream of insults.
I think that calling for Brady’s resignation is the way to go. The point of this thread was supposed to be that Pete and Val COULD lay the groundwork for Brady’s dismissal, have chosen not to do it, AND lied about it.
My question is which race is more important to the legislature? They’ve said this won’t be tolerated but what they meant is the Asian vote isn’t that important. If he had used the N word would there have been an actual backlash? Said something derogatory about Muslims, Latinos? Would that have generated something more than a bs response? Or in reality is everything tolerated?