Now – if you can find where I ever said they were going to happen, then you perhaps can make the leap that I “didn’t seem to mind.” I didn’t – so you can’t.

Obama lied to get elected, and you didn’t seem to mind.

Look at what Segarra said — he and other paid campaign workers were given these fliers during a scheduled training at the Williams Mullen law firm, sent to black precincts, and instructed to give them to black voters.

That’s pretty clear, and pretty obviously willful. I know, I know, Brian, it was an office joke that just got out of hand, right? I don’t think that’s going to work this time.

Besides, we were talking about YOUR ethics, you putting forth an indefensible, unethical position.

Obama better watch out, since you are on record saying his campaign promises were fake.

And don’t try to change the subject. Those fliers were for one purpose only: to mislead the voters. Incumbents who agree to appear together is nowhere near the same as the (potentially illegal) use of a likeness to give the impression that the two people support each other. Especially since Sessoms supported McCain.

If incumbents who don’t support each other can be on fliers, why not challengers?

My goodness – even Sessoms hasn’t gone that far.

Which law? The disclaimer law?

Somebody’s guilty of not putting a disclaimer on a handout. Maybe the campaign is guilty of that.

I heard a radio ad telling me not to believe a candidate’s newspaper ads, even though every word in the ad was true and every claim was cited.

Bruce Williams says the point was change. Change in the White House and change in the Mayor’s office. It didn’t say they supported each other. It didn’t say they were running on a ticket. It’s a non-partisan race, for crying out loud.

I saw organizations run ads supporting all the incumbents, even though they hardly ever vote the same way unless it’s to approve the minutes of the last meeting.

I think there’s an issue about the disclaimer for someone. But if you want to pursue content, I don’t see how you can advocate stifling political speech without far-reaching repercussions.

http://hamptonroads.com/2008/11/oberndorf-campaign-files-complaint-sessomsobama-flier

He changed his position and just because you didn’t hear him doesn’t mean he didn’t. Of course, his illegal fliers on Election Day showed that he changed his position AGAIN. I can actually understand why you weren’t up on his latest position. And let’s wait and see about the investigation before we lie down at his feet as our “Mayor-Elect.” At least I won’t.

“During the forum, Sessoms offered a surprise with his call for an affordable housing component in every new residential development.”
http://hamptonroads.com/2008/09/new-set-rules-virginia-beach-elections

Just because you didn’t hear it doesn’t mean he didn’t say it. Google still works.

I don’t know who produced the flyer, but for you to say falsehoods about the Mayor-elect’s public statements needs to be corrected.

Also, keep in mind that Oberndorf didn’t need to come up with 7000 votes, just half of that plus one. You swing 3501 of Will’s “illegal” votes and Oberndorf wins.

You might get your wish after all. Harvey Bryant, Commonwealth’s Attorney, has agreed to investigate and is also considering bringing in a special prosecutor. No word on when he is hoping to have it completed. But a number of people have met with him and brought him quite a bit of evidence, so we may see some real fireworks from all of this. Good for Harvey — this is a real stench that needs cleaning up.

And which came first – the candidates running ahead or the Pilot’s endorsements? I still think you are giving the Pilot too much credit.

The Pilot didn’t endorse Obama, but they didn’t endorse McCain. Almost everyone they did endorse won (except for one campaign for school board, for which their one-line endorsement didn’t do the trick).

I’d have to look at the numbers more closely to see if I agree about Wilson running ahead of Sessoms in certain areas. My gut tells me that it shouldn’t have been the case, simply because Wilson had more opponents.

And Sessoms endorsed McCain, which negates the issues part completely. You think anyone actually read the flier at the polls? I think not. A picture is worth a thousand words.

As for who to accuse – well, if the SBE and CA did their job and investigated this, we’d know who to accuse. But if the end result is a $100 fine, they aren’t going to waste resources doing so.

Also, of course Wilson ran ahead of Sessoms. Sessoms had Moss and Taylor running to the right of him.

Whomever did the flyer should’ve used the proper disclaimer, but the issues printed on it are things Sessoms has said in forums and other advertising.

Which brings up another problem. If no one knows who printed the flyers, whom does anyone accuse?