tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7703913.post1777418813289677681..comments2023-10-02T04:41:34.722-04:00Comments on Marry in Massachusetts: Di's Hole Truthmassmarrierhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02358207247771711952noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7703913.post-3465005319581426382008-10-17T07:42:00.000-04:002008-10-17T07:42:00.000-04:00Thanks for the info about the server. I assume you...Thanks for the info about the server. I assume you, anon p, are connected with the site and/or campaign and know this stuff. I'll check back until the general.<BR/><BR/>In terms of "naive" and "not proven," she is not in a good position. She likes to stonewall and refuses to say she made any error, except maybe in accounting. Yet, the plea bargain with the AG, the convictions for tax offenses and judgments for repeated bad checks and non-payment to her condo association take any shine off claims of innocence.<BR/><BR/>I am truly sorry when a lawmaker who votes my way allows such distractions. These also undermine public faith and trust, as well as undercut her relations with other legislators.<BR/><BR/>On her site for the moment, the biggest lie remains one of omission. By rebuilding the supporter page to suggest that she is still endorsed by the long list is deceptive. It's not a total lie, but far less than honest.<BR/><BR/>A long-term friend, a psychologist who happens to be black has been chuckling over all this. He says she's a politician and you just have to expect such shenanigans. I'm not there yet.massmarrierhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02358207247771711952noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7703913.post-36060277432638258382008-10-17T06:38:00.000-04:002008-10-17T06:38:00.000-04:00This is good. I can understand your point but res...This is good. I can understand your point but respectfully disagree. The website was under construction and being moved to a different provider. This is fact. It was not left unattended nor was it dysfunctional due to any oversight, incompetence, or negligence. In fact, her original web-sight was still functioning at the time this article came out. If you look for the truth you will find it. As people, if you are aware of psychology, everyone has built in bias which is why each science incorporates methods to eliminate it. The articles that some of the media have introduced and encouraged bias intentionally and incessantly. Lastly, there have been no lies. There are no statements she has backed down from or felt the need to correct. The omitted "lies" you speak of are an assumptions / bias drawn from articles. She has not been proven a liar and will not be proven so. Finally, we must question the logic of your statement: "what does that imply about what goes on where they can't see?" Since the first statement about her being a liar has not been proven true, the remaining implication is presumptuous at best. If you claim to be impartial, then, since she has not been found guilty of lying, why is she being convicted by the media? In fact, she has a greater history of hard work, honesty, and progressive change than any of the negative things currently being published. Don't be naive, speech is not free in America. There is a price to pay. Expect counter actions when exposed to attacks, especially blatantly, unwarranted, negative attacks.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04915315879825576978noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7703913.post-45966077751685528042008-10-17T05:58:00.000-04:002008-10-17T05:58:00.000-04:00That's an amusing attempted defense. PolitickerMA ...That's an amusing attempted defense. <A HREF="http://www.politickerma.com/wilkerson-chang-diaz-breakdown" REL="nofollow">PolitickerMA</A> among others have drawn attention to Wilkerson's endorsements and claims. In fact, she has drawn considerable attention to herself, website included. She's asked for folk to look.<BR/><BR/>When lies of commission and omission are obvious, they say much of her ability and responsibility. If constituents can't trust the public statements, what does that imply about what goes on where they can't see?massmarrierhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02358207247771711952noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7703913.post-148933211703581022008-10-16T21:39:00.000-04:002008-10-16T21:39:00.000-04:00Ummm so tell me this? Who would be so into the Se...Ummm so tell me this? Who would be so into the Senator's website as to go into explicit detail regarding the functionality of it? I could understand the Senator herself but why anyone else but maybe the campaign team or someone previously a part of the team? I think it is pretty obvious this article is distasteful at best. Does Diaz need this much help to win? Apparently she must need her supporters to scrunge for every milligram of fungus they can find to try and discourage Senator Wilkerson from running. This is sad. You would think this race could be about ability.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04915315879825576978noreply@blogger.com