bfrankdc

If you want to parse "snickering" versus "laughing", that is your right. Mr. Malson used the word "laughing" in his email to me. That is a fact. Since I was there and you were not, then I don't see where you have the right to make any characterizations about the situation. I would guess the candidates all have their strategies about how they will engage the electorate. It just seems odd that Mr. Rees would tell everyone ahead of time that he was going to skip a candidate opportunity, and then lie to one of his supposed endorsements about his presence, or lack there of, at a function. Where did I say that attending functions like last night (which still was not a debate) was the only way to establish serious credibility in a race? I merely pointed out that given the topic at hand, the the participating entities (Mr. Rees's "endorsements"), that Mr. Rees's presence should have been a no-brainer. Why did Mr. Rees lie to Mr. Malson? Is lying to an supposedly endorsing organization the actions of someone who is worthy of a vote? B. Frank I think even the most sardonic of political scientists would dispute your 99% claim. Look at the combined television ratings of the 2004 Presidential debates. At the local level, the Mayoral functions in the Fall and to date have been very well attended (remember the one you went to while your children posted on line at DCist in your place?). WUSA televised a forum earlier this winter. Eventhough it was a weekday morning event, the tracking numbers on it were pretty good. Traditionally the Ward and ANC debates sponsored by the WPCA, CPCA, CCCA, the Tenley and Palisades groups all are fairly well packed. I anticipate that it will be the case again this year. What better place for the electorate to compare and contrast styles and substance of the candidates, than to see them at one place and one time. Will every voter attend at least one ddebate? Of course not. But to dismiss them completely, and further to lie to the DC Hospital Association, a group that has been touted as one of your endorsing entities, seems to me to be flushing any sense of credibility down the commode. B. Frank

This directly contradicts your earlier pronouncements calling me out, when I was there and you were relying on your "brother" to provide facts. I like that you are also backtracking on the supposed conversation you had with Mr. Malson. Now, to your post, the thing that you/Rees fail to understand about these gatherings is that any opportunity for voters and "opinion leaders" and the media to see all of the candidates together at one time allow for good compare and contrast evaluations. Further, the Ward 3 Democrats are essentially the gate keepers for opinion leaders for this particular race given all of the candidates are infact running as democrats. While the turnout was small (more like 40 than 20), this was not a Ward 3 electoral event. This was a regular monthly meeting of the Ward 3 democrats, where the candidates were offered the opportunity to introduce themselves to the membership. Given the topic of the evening was supposedly Mr. Rees's "sweet spot", logic would dictate that he would be there if he were serious about representing Ward 3 on the City Council. By his pronouncements prior to the forum for planning on skipping it (see "the grim reaper" http://www.dcmessageboards.com/index.php?showtopic=8201), and then lying to Bob Marlson, the President of an organization whom Rees has claimed will endorse (or has endorsed) his candidacy, seems at best, a little odd. I guess if taping laser printed flyers (supposedly from the Dominican Republic, or Puerto Rico, depending on which reference of the Candidate you want to cite) that have possibly illegal disclaimers on them as a "bang up job", then I guess we will have to disagree about what makes an effective political campaign. B. Frank

While I will not stoop to reposting emails as Mr. Rees does, suffice it to say that even Mr. Malson characterized the reaction as "laughter". I stand by my original posting. B. Frank

1. It was both males and females snickering. 2. He has received an email as to what he didn't know. 3. I didn't talk to Sam Brooks before, during or after the event. 4. I don't know Sam Brooks. Last night was the first time I saw him, and the other candidates, in person, see #3. 5. I don't know a Robert Branson. 6. I saw no one using a camera phone, but if that happened, then you now know I am not Sam Brooks, as was demonstrated when I looked you square in the eyes while you were posting you now definately illegal campagin posters (since they all say that Mindy is your campaign manager, and we know that to be false, per your website -- at $25 per infraction, those will add up pretty quick, espcecially since you have pledged not to spend more than $500 on your campaign). What two candidates told this to "Robert Branson"? Please provide specifics. I am glad the rest of this is on the record for all to see and enjoy. B. Frank

So why did he send Mr. Malson a note sayng he was ill when he knew in advance that he was not going? What did he have to hide by lying to Mr. Malson - a person who is supposedly endorsing Mr. Rees candidacy? B. Frank

Then ask Mr. Malson. Since I was there, and you are hearing this from "your brother", why don't you ask someone independant who was there. To add to the truth, Mr. Rees made numerous statements about the ineffectiveness of public debates and forums, and under no uncertain terms stated that he was not going to attend or particpate in them. Given such strong statements about such public appearances, why did Mr. Rees send Mr. Malson a note stating that he was not attending the event because he was ill? If there was any event hand tailored to Mr. Rees's strengths as a candidate, this was it, yet no Rees. B. Frank

I thought it was pretty funny that Bob Malson, President of the DC Hospital Association (a group that Rees claims is endorsing him...see my other post)....indicated that he received an email from Candidate Rees apologizing for his absense due to being sick. The laughter from the audience over this statement was unforgettable, especially given Rees's pre-forum pronoucements against public appearances. Priceless quote from Malson, " I guess there is something about Jonathan Rees that I don't know". B. Frank

OK, I found a mention of the event on Page 3, the "Week Ahead" box. However, this is a reference of the monthly meeting of the organization with the primary topic being health care with the DC Hospital Association and the DC Primary Care Association. There is no mention of the "mini-Forum" or other aspects of the evening as it pertains to the Ward 3 race. I am not sure what "Gay Republican's" brother was referring to, since "Gay Republican" clearly states that there is a reference to the Ward 3 Candidates "mini Forum". I would think that given Candidate Rees's pronouncements on, and involvement in the health care industry, this would be a "must attend" event: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/tenleytown/message/3319 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ward3dc/message/89 Here are links from some "Rees Supporters" in the Health Care industry: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/tenleytown/message/3331 (Dr. Michael Griffiths) http://groups.yahoo.com/group/tenleytown/message/2979 (Kathleen Roddy, Nurse) In this post, "Ms. Roddy" claims that some of the organizations who will be represented tonight at St. Columba's, will infact be endorsing Candidate Rees. http://72.14.207.104/search?q=cache:zqwROf...ntal-care&hl=en "The American Healthcare Campaign Endorses Jonathan R. Rees For DC City Council, Ward 3 Seat Because His Vision Of Health Care For All Is Our Vision. Check Us Out. http://www.yourahcc.org/" Yet, despite his public pronouncements on Health Care in the District, and his endorsements from national associations, Mr. Rees is declining to attend. Why? B. Frank

Hmmm...I am looking at last week's NW Current. What page is this event discussed?

Actually it is a Ward 3 Democrats discussion about the proposed Medical Center: The Ward 3 Democratic Committee regular monthly meeting will take place this Tuesday evening at 7:30PM at St. Columba's Episcopal Church, 4201 Albemarle St. NW (one block west of the Tenleytown Metro). There will be a special presentation on "Serving the Health Care Needs of the City's Underserved Population: Is a New Hospital the Answer?" The program will feature representatives from the Citizens for the National Capital Medical Center, the DC Hospital Association and the the DC Primary Care Association. The health care presentation will start at approximately 8PM. There will be time for questions. The meeting is open to all registered Democratics. For further information, call Ward 3 Democratic Chair, Bob Brandon at 966-5333. I am surprised "Gay Republican" would be invited or want to attend, given the sponsor of the event. B. Frank

Interesting, on mine they simply show up as sponsored links. no pop up, or anything different from any other web search. That is across different browsers and platforms (Wintel/Linux/MacOSX, etc.)

So when you include Rees and Brooks in the same sentence: What are you referring to? Clearly Mr. Brooks online keyword purchases are not the same as sending spam emails and posting incessantly on Blogs and Listserves, is it? B. Frank

If you know who Eric Marshall is, then you must know who Alec Evans is. B. Frank

What makes you think Kathy will carry Ward 3? Why is Eric Marshall arrogant and abrasive? B. Frank

Is that why you always call Alec Evans, Alex?

Interesting. So what advertising is Rees doing online?

What kind of internet campaign advertising has Sam Brooks done? I haven't seen any. Please provide links. B. Frank

Here is my take: Eric Gaull (Palisades)...experienced, but while I have never met him, or had any personal interaction with him, your characterizatoin is probably not far off. Cathy Wiss...ANC3D Commissioner (North Cleveland Park/Tenleytown). I don't think she is an air head, but I probably disagree with some of her anti development pronouncements. I am also not familiar with any leadership she has demonstrated as an ANC Commissioner, although I will expect that this will come out during the campaign. Robert Gordon...a businessman and consultant, Chair of ANC3/4G (Chevy Chase, DC), hasn't been very active in his role in the community until a newfound visibility during the Fall. He seems to be very levelheaded and balanced, and willing to go to bat for issues he cares about. I have no idea what kind of leadership he has demonstrated as chair, but like Wiss, I expect this to come out during the course of the campaign. Mary Cheh (Forest Hills), a GWU law professor. People who know her really think she is fabulous. She was involved with the whole 'demonstrators being arrested' thing back in 2002. She worked with and testified before Kathy Patterson on that. Her educational and professional credentials are probably the strongest of any of the declared candidates. However, we will have to see where she is on various issues of concern to Ward 3 citizens. It will also be interesting to see what kind of political base she is able to develop. Sam Brooks (Cleveland Park/Forest Hills) is probably the most politically saavy amongst the field of candidates. He has good insider DC experience inside the walls of the Wilson building. If Fenty becomes the new Mayor, having Sam as a Ward 3 Council person will be good for the citizens of the Ward. He also has managed the largest financial war chest of the candidates. However, he is young. It is still a question if his youth is an asset, or a liability, and only the electoral process will answer that question. As evidenced by his blog, he does have a good grasp of the issues, and is also willing to take stands. There is a core set of beliefs there. It will also be interesting to see what kind of base Brooks is able to manufacture within the Ward. Jonathan Rees (Glover Park)...Mr. Rees is an interesting case. If I had taken his claims at face value when I first came across his name, I would have thought he would have been a terrific candidate. Educated, lengthy professional experience, family man. However, over the course of 3-4 months, I have not been able to verify any of the claims he has made on his background. Further, the incessant overusage of the internet to fuel his campaign, in the form of unwanted email and inappropriate and excessive message board/blog banter makes this candidate unattractive at a minimum, and abusive and intolerant to worse. I firmly believe that the slate of candidates is not set. However, if the above is what we have, I would say that it will be a race between Cheh and Gordon. B. Frank

Because there have been numerous contradictory statements. Mr. Rees brought these "facts" upon himself, only to change and retract some of the most basic facts about an individual. No one cares about the core of it. It is the lies, deletions from his website (coverup) and changes in story whcih go to the root of the person. As a public candidate for office, it is important. B. Frank

While that is true, Mr. Rees is the one to have claimed: -there is one deceased wife and one current wife, and that was all. No mention of the others; -no children, two children, three children, three children and a foster child-- twins, not twins, whatever; - Was it NYU or Columbia U? - What was the professional history? Because none of it matches, nonr is there any professional record; - What is "Jonathan Rees & Company" and why wasn't that on the previously disclosed, but now deleted CV? - The multitude of court cases with one sided stories that contradict the public record; You see, there is no obligation for a candidate to put personal history on the record. However, when they do, and it proves to not be valid, it raises questions about the legitimacy of the rest of the picture. There is no "looking for dirt", but rather the regular due diligence any voter would perform on any candidate for office. Seems to me that the candidate in question is trying to sweep the dirt under the rug, but the rug is too full. Just my two cents. B. Frank

I have seen his postion statements, if you can call them that, at DCWatch. I have seen postings on DCist, but the position statements there are not backed up with any facts and appear to be more incoherent ramblings. On DC Watch, for example, there is a posting about Law and the balance of power, http://www.dcwatch.com/election2006/rees02.htm THE BALANCE OF POWER BETWEEN THE EXECUTIVE, LEGISLATIVE AND JUDICIAL BRANCHES OF GOVERNMENT In the District of Columbia more than anywhere else in the USA, the judicial branch of government has run rampant, unchecked and the balance is way out of kilt and it is time to push back the judicial branch before it controls everything. EVER NOTICE….That the only people who ever praise the so called good works of judges are judges but nobody else thinks so? I love these self-righteous over paid angels of Lucifer as they puff up their Résumé as having graduated magna ejaculate laude from a top notch law school, member of some great society, God fearing, champion of some great cause but at the same time can’t explain why judges in America now have one the highest rates of divorce and acts of adultery, substance abuse and mental illness of any profession, and at the same time, they know how messed up they are that they create laws that prevents John Q. Public from suing or removing them and rally behind any and all efforts to quash anyone who dares to challenge them by setting that person up for a fall. Never forget, it was a panel of judges, the most educated in the laws of God and man’s laws that sentenced Jesus to death out of sheer vindictiveness because he just didn’t want to go along with the program. To show how messed up DC judges are, I know six of them who have children you can find at DuPont Circle high on drugs often because they were too busy climbing up that pedestal that they had no time to raise their children correctly and at one time, I had to pick up off the side walk one of these judges’ kids, call to his mother (DC Superior Court Judge) to arrange to get him before the U S Park Police was going to lock him up and waited there until she and her lawyer husband arrived to haul him off. The sad truth is, too many judges in DC are psychologically messed up, have messed up marriages and families and that is all because they have been too busy alienating themselves from most of us, climbing up that delusional pedestal of greatness and spending too much time figuring out ways of screwing over the little guy while planning out new ways as to how John Q. Public should kiss their ass. I believe that a condition of judgeship in DC after appointment is that yearly each judge much undergo an extensive psychological evaluation with the prospect of suspension with pay if it is determine that the judge shows signs of depression, stress, substance abuse, extensive family problems and etcetera. I also believe that no judge to the Superior Court of the District of Columbia should serve more than one eight year term, no re-appointment possibility and that the Commission on Disability and Tenure should be revamped as it has been way too weak and forgiving of judicial abuses. I am not against our judges but they have to start being more realistic and treat John Q. Public better than they do as they are often no better than the people they pass judgment upon. Right now, I could go to the Washington Post, name six DC Superior Court judges who have children hooked on drugs, judges who live a double life but very covertly and that would make a heck of a good story with the title “Falling From The Pedestal”. Add to this a DC Superior Court judge who was arrested for beating his own wife and others who did the dumbest things most of us missed in the papers or it was suppressed as a favor from you and me learning about. I think in DC, there are many who know already what I do but sit on it out of fear of facing the wrath of the judges if they open their mouths. Yet, what I say cannot detract from the fact that half of the judges are good people who really try hard to do right and treat John Q. Public with the utmost respect but it is the other half, all of us should be concerned with because dealing with them is like going under the knife for surgery with a surgeon under the influence. Today our judges sit in judgment of us and whether or not we are fit for a wide variety of things in life but maybe the time has come where the voters have a tool, where we can sit in judgment of them as they are servants of the people and when we see that they need to be removed and forced into treatment or counseling, the task should not be insurmountable and the legal industry not be allowed to encase itself in this unbreakable shell it has put itself in. In sum, probably 95% of our judges would not agree with me but 95% of the people not in the legal field would and when we as voters talk about the poor services we are getting as taxpayers, let’s not ignore the garbage we get tossed from the judicial branch too. Committee To Elect Jonathan R. Rees Democrat For Ward 3 City Council P.O. Box 21422, Washington, DC 20009 It's All About ........You...! See Rees' Political Platform At: http://www.dc2006.net I Want Your Support In The Democratic Primary On Tuesday, September 12th, 2006 ______________________________________________________________________ So I ask, what is the position here, and how can any voter take him seriously.

Human, Where have I ever made any pronouncements about any issues that would lead you to believe I am a democrat? I have plenty of ideas for improving the conditions in DC. Many of them are ones that you, as a self-proclaimed republican, would embrace. However, I am not the candidate here. Mr. Rees is. However he has made nary a statement in this forum about any political proposals or solutions. Everything from him in this forum has been about lies about himself and lies about his opponents. I am simply trying to get some honesty about this candidate, yet all I ever get is more "multiple alias" postings. B. Frank

I have never characterized my political leanings, but to call this a democrat versus democrat "bashing" would be false. Further, as far as I know, Candidate Brooks has never posted on this forum. Further, none of the others posting here are Brooks supporters, know the guy, or have anything to do with him. Candidate Rees has made numerous claims about his prefoessional and personal background. To date, none of them have turned out to be true. Given the massive amount of anti-gay rhetoric at the hands of Mr. Rees and "his supporters", I am surprised that you, "Gay Republican" would think he is the better candidate. B. Frank

Please provide proof that anything I have said is false? Where are my lies? I can, and have, backed up any and all of my posts. B. Frank