Thursday, January 26, 2006

So. Here We Are.

We are now at the intersection of Conjecture and Incredible Coincidence.

Both campaigns verified that the email was authentic. The Zamora campaign asked pointedly if anyone from their campaign had shared it. The answer is "no."

John Laesch responded by offering me a good schooling in public relations. In that email, Laesch states, "I did write the e-mail, but I don't think that it is in anyone's best interst to get this information on the streets."

Thanks for the lesson.

And of Zamora, Laesch also says, " If you take every race in 2002 and 2004 and compare three factors (money raised, total votes and % increase), you will learn quite a bit. Zamora did OK for the amount of $ he raised. Prior to my stepping in this race, he had not yet raised $5K and probably would not have done too much better than last time (we will never know).

"I believe that bringing to light the issue of ethics in public forum does not help our party or Zamora's future poltical (sic)ambitions."

That was interesting. We will never know? Sounds pretty sure. Pretty cock sure.

And bringing to light the issue of ethics? Come now. Let's turn for a moment to a different ethical question for a moment.

What if a candidate received an endorsement, then the endorsement was withdrawn? Wouldn't an ethical candidate want to clarify the situation for the same public which had received their press information about said endorsement?

Here's another bite of a followup email from a source close to the Laesch campaign:
    Interesting that he hasn't retracted the story about Laesch getting a PDA endorsement. PDA cancelled plans to endorse Laesch when it turned out that the local chapter which voted for the endorsement had never had a public meeting and had ignored numerous emails asking for the meeting times and locations.
Who, I inquired, would be responsible for such a gaffe?

When I directed an email to the contact for this PDA group for clarification, I received the following terse response:
    ...Our chapter of the PDA, which is the Progressive Democrats of the 14th Congressional District, did endorse John Laesch and that endorsement is not, nor will it be, withdrawn. Many members of our group are currently working with the Laesch campaign and we will continue to do so. The state chapter of the PDA, Progressive Democrats of Illinois, has decided not to endorse a candidate in the primary for the 14th congressional race. The national chapter is currently deciding whether to endorse, and if so who to endorse. I hope this will clear some points up for you, let me know if you have any other questions.
    Jessie Duco

Now the coincidences are stacking up, I thought. So I sent another email back to Jessie Duco, which read, essentially:
    You didn't really answer my question. Perhaps it's better if I pull a quote from another email I recently received about John Laesch's candidacy:"

    ( see above quote )

    Is this true? If it is, are you planning to respond somehow? If it's not, why would someone say that about an endorsement by a Democratic group?

    One more question -- Are you related to Matthew Duco, John Laesch's communications director?
That email hasn't been answered, yet. If you're out there, Jessie, I'd still like to know.

No comments: