Jump to content
Washington DC Message Boards

Bfrank, Truthseeker, etc you are losing the battle


Recommended Posts

All of you are focusing on all the wrong stuff in your effort to discredit a candidate and it is not working.

 

Why? Because how many people out there have been married or divorced a few times? How many men have children out of wedlock? Right, in 2006 nobody cares and all these issues you have been using for months are not phasing voters but may be turning people off and in favor of the guy you are attacking as dipping into the family life is a big no no in 2006 and turn people off.

 

Think about it.

 

Our blogs will come slowly and they will contain matters that will turn peoples heads and it will not contain the dumb things all of you use unsuccessfully.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

All of you are focusing on all the wrong stuff in your effort to discredit a candidate and it is not working.

 

Why? Because how many people out there have been married or divorced a few times? How many men have children out of wedlock? Right, in 2006 nobody cares and all these issues you have been using for months are not phasing voters but may be turning people off and in favor of the guy you are attacking as dipping into the family life is a big no no in 2006 and turn people off.

 

Think about it.

 

Our blogs will come slowly and they will contain matters that will turn peoples heads and it will not contain the dumb things all of you use unsuccessfully.

 

No one gives a damn now many times anyone's been married or how often they've procreated. It's the lying that's the issue. Character matters, to put it simply.

 

Note to B: Lookout! ! !! He's going to Blog!!!!! Oh, no, have mercy! Anything but that! ;-) Didn't someone recently post that "99.9 percent" of voters don't read blogs? And, elsewhere, that bloggers are "stupid?" What an enigmatic, mercurial fascinator our little pal is.

 

I look forward to a "blog" bursting at the seams with hearsay, and completely devoid of any verifiable links.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is none of your business most voters will feel how many times a man has been married.

 

You will be seen as crossing the line.

 

Again, his private life is none of your business and you are making fools of yourselves on the issue.

 

Find something he says on his website and then find evidence that he is wrong, he tried it before and it failed or find something like maybe he caused an employer a major loss but not the crap you all are coming with.

 

We were given evidence by prominient men in the gay community that Sam Brooks has been sleeping with older men and then taking money for it. That is his private business and should never be used to attack his candidacy and thus we would never use it as that is a private thing.

 

 

No one gives a damn now many times he\\\\\\\'s been married. It\\\\\\\'s the lying that\\\\\\\'s the issue. Character matters.

 

Note to B: Lookout! ! !! He\\\\\\\'s going to Blog!!!!! Oh, no, have mercy! Anything but that! ;-) Didn\\\\\\\'t someone recently post that \\\\\\\"99.9 percent\\\\\\\" of voters don\\\\\\\'t read blogs? And, elsewhere, that bloggers are \\\\\\\"stupid?\\\\\\\" What an enigmatic, mercurial fascinator our little pal is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, actually people do care about the person -- the candidate. Character, honesty -- those are issues. And in Jonathan Rees' case, it's so clear that there's none of that: no honesty, no character. (And where did Rees go to school? We're still waiting for an answer.) Instead, what we get with Jonathan Rees is somebody who's crossed over the line that separates just plain strange to something a lot scarier.

 

All of you are focusing on all the wrong stuff in your effort to discredit a candidate and it is not working.

 

Why? Because how many people out there have been married or divorced a few times? How many men have children out of wedlock? Right, in 2006 nobody cares and all these issues you have been using for months are not phasing voters but may be turning people off and in favor of the guy you are attacking as dipping into the family life is a big no no in 2006 and turn people off.

 

Think about it.

 

Our blogs will come slowly and they will contain matters that will turn peoples heads and it will not contain the dumb things all of you use unsuccessfully.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If it is a different "Jonathan R Rees" then what is your concern?

 

So, you had personal information on your website. It has been deleted.

So, you had professional information on your website. It has been deleted.

So, you had educational background information on your website. It has been deleted.

 

They were all deleted after folks discovered that your version of your life didn't quite measure up to reality.

 

Now all you have left is to make up things about your opponents.

 

Good luck with that.

 

B. Frank

 

PS...there doesn't appear top BE another "Jonathan R Rees".

 

 

It is none of your business most voters will feel how many times a man has been married.

 

You will be seen as crossing the line.

 

Again, his private life is none of your business and you are making fools of yourselves on the issue.

 

Find something he says on his website and then find evidence that he is wrong, he tried it before and it failed or find something like maybe he caused an employer a major loss but not the crap you all are coming with.

 

We were given evidence by prominient men in the gay community that Sam Brooks has been sleeping with older men and then taking money for it. That is his private business and should never be used to attack his candidacy and thus we would never use it as that is a private thing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is your amateurish approach to things why Rees has been able to mock everyone so successfully.

 

There are in fact three Jonathan R. Rees in the DC area and none of them are listed in the telephone book, two of them are listed with the DMV, one with the board of elections, two with the public library system and of course, one of them is about to be released from prison in 2007.

 

If you were truly good at what you do, then you would not have overlooked any of this but you seem to enjoy jumping the gun.

 

Wait until we do his blog and then see what means to do a professional job of digging up facts and making sure they check out.

 

Let us give you an example about this Jonathan R. Rees. Recently we saw a dispute over where he worked. Did we just rely on an internet search? No, we went to his places of work and actually saw him there.

 

If you were pros then you would not be making all the mistakes you do.

 

If it is a different "Jonathan R Rees" then what is your concern?

 

So, you had personal information on your website. It has been deleted.

So, you had professional information on your website. It has been deleted.

So, you had educational background information on your website. It has been deleted.

 

They were all deleted after folks discovered that your version of your life didn't quite measure up to reality.

 

Now all you have left is to make up things about your opponents.

 

Good luck with that.

 

B. Frank

 

PS...there doesn't appear top BE another "Jonathan R Rees".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...