neatly separate into one of two categories. First: those who call for
inclusion, acceptance and cooperation. Second: those who cynically
exploit fear, mistrust and prejudice. In the District 19 State Senate
contest, Roger Manno is continuing his positive, issues-based campaign
focused on his view that "leadership takes teamwork." Sadly, his
opponent Mike Lenett is running a dirty campaign unprecedented in
Montgomery County history. This according to History Professor and
Gazette Columnist Allan Lichtman, who noted that Lenett is making a
"blatant appeal to ethnic prejudice," adding, "With some justice, Manno
has countered by accusing Lenett of having taken county politics 'into
the gutter like no other candidate before him.'" Lenett also created (or
authorized) a vicious website that attacked Roger Manno's wife, and his
campaign benefited from a hidden-identity swift-boat type group and push
polling that dishonestly attacked Manno.
As we celebrated Labor Day, Lenett kicked off a carpet-bombing onslaught
on constituents' mailboxes. Some Lenett mailers depict gang members or
otherwise imply that violent criminals support Manno. One employs
"cutout" letters to depict Manno as physically threatening voters like a
kidnapper or terrorist. A Lenett mailer hopes to trick readers into
thinking Lenett's accusations came from newspapers. They didn't.
Lenett's mailers include attacks on Roger Manno's wife Marjorie--a
self-made woman of rare intellect and character, and a true role model.
Some Lenett mailers accuse the Mannos of "lying under oath" and a
"cover-up." Why? Because Manno filed amended financial reports--even
though Lenett filed several amended campaign finance reports of his own.
Maryland Politics Watch (MPW) is working overtime posting Lenett's
attack mailers, along with the "kinder, gentler" but still disingenuous
ones depicting an accomplished state Senator bearing little resemblance
to reality.
A recent Lenett mailing tells voters, "There's So Much More to Do."
Considering what Lenett has done already, including championing
legislation to let Proctor & Gamble keep polluting the Chesapeake Bay,
"alienating" his colleagues as a "divisive force" who can't work with
others, and one of the least effective legislators in the General
Assembly, his "to do list" should convince people they should vote for
Manno. All of Lenett's mailers--and there sure have been a lot of
them--distort or dismiss known facts, lower the level of discourse,
and/or think voters are fools. We're not buying it. Please see: "Frosh:
Veto Phosphate Ban Delay"
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/annapolis/2008/04/frosh_veto_phosphate_ban_delay.html
and "Choices in Montgomery"
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/08/22/AR2010082202584.html
and "Consistency in the state legislature"
http://www.gazette.net/stories/09012010/montedi180547_32533.php and "The
List: How does your legislator rank?" http://www.gazette.net/thelist/
District 19 has a long-standing tradition for teamwork, fairness, and
civility. Lenett is out of step with this tradition. Manno upholds it.
People should face up to their record honestly and responsibly.
Unfortunately, not all candidates can do that. Several people made this
assertion: A push poll smear campaign was unleashed against Delegate
Roger Manno to trick District 19 voters. Using such underhanded, Karl
Rove tactics in a primary suggests more about the candidate trying to
benefit from them than the innocent targets of the push polls--the Manno
campaign as well as the District 19 voters who deserve better.
MPW is on the front lines officiating the "crossfire" between the Lenett
and Manno campaigns regarding gun control, pointing out factual
errors--if not out-right misrepresentations--in a recent official Lenett
campaign mailer: "What Lenett does not say and Tripwire apparently does
not know is that Manno also favors gun control. One of his first acts
upon arriving in Annapolis was to introduce a local bill allowing
Montgomery County to pass additional restrictions on guns that would
have gone beyond state standards. See:
http://maryland-politics.blogspot.com/2010/09/lenett-manno-trade-fire-on-guns.html
MPW also reported that "A secretive independent mailing sent into
District 19 is in apparent violation of Maryland campaign finance law
... is linked to a union that has endorsed one of the competing Senate
candidates. We expose that union's identity today." That endorsed
candidate happens to be Sen. Lenett. This raises some troubling
concerns, as MPW observes, "The mailer appears to be illegal in multiple
ways." See:
http://maryland-politics.blogspot.com/2010/09/union-linked-to-independent-expenditure.html
When some candidates feel the heat, they resort to fast-talking excuses
or even dirty tricks like "push polls" and sneak-attack mailers. With a
record so stained that not even phosphate-laden detergent can clean it,
the Lenett campaign is resorting to dirty tricks. It's not just MPW,
Gazette Readers and the Manno Campaign objecting to the Lenett
Campaign's "win at all costs" approach and it's not just the Washington
Post, the Gazette, Progressive Maryland and many others giving Sen.
Lenett a failing grade. When people say "Sen. Mike Lenett will do
anything to win," they sure have a lot of reasons to say so.
OK, so Lenett is clearly ineffective, alienating to colleagues, willing
to sell-out constituents and the Chesapeake Bay to serve out-of-state
special interests, and so on, but is Manno that much better? Yes, he
most certainly is. When the bill Manno co-authored with NOW President
Terry O'Neill to protect women from deceptive "crisis pregnancy centers"
couldn't get traction in Annapolis, Manno worked with Montgomery County
leaders and the Council to get it passed here. The League of
Conservation Voters, Environment Maryland and the Sierra Club asked
Manno to sponsor HB 522, their priority legislation in 2010. When it
stalled in the General Assembly, Manno worked with the O'Malley
Administration on an executive order which directs the Public Service
Commission to plan Maryland's clean energy needs. A huge triumph for
those of us concerned about clean energy, global warming, and making
Maryland a leader in the 21st century energy economy. This is typical
Manno--when he hits a roadblock on an important issue, he finds another
way to make progress for Maryland.
Manno is also more adept at getting important bills passed into law than
Lenett. A few examples: In 2009 Manno's Green Jobs bill helped Maryland
secure a $5.8 million grant from the U.S. Department of Labor Employment
and Training Administration. Manno's 2009 "Apprenticeship Opportunities
Act" (HB 644) created a partnership between businesses, community
colleges, and existing programs for green jobs. Manno's Maryland Organic
Transition Investment Pilot Program passed after he worked with Capitol
Hill to bring $millions in support to Maryland. Then he improved and
extended MOTIPP. It's one thing to vote the right way when people are
watching (and scoring). It's better to be the difference-maker. Manno
drove progress on key issues, and that makes him better. That's leadership.
As MPW readers know there are leaders and then there's Senate President
Mike "Big Daddy" Miller. Many if not most progressive reform legislation
ends up in the State Senate dust bin. Lenett has cast his lot with
Miller. Progressives support Manno because of his independence, courage,
and knack for getting more done in Annapolis than Lenett. Real policy
differences between these candidates underscore these views. Also, while
Lenett may have more cash on hand than Manno, he's "loaned" most of that
to himself, and spent it at an incredible rate by printing enough walk
pieces and massive mailers to clear cut a forest! Some environmentalist!
Lenett boasts of several endorsements, and that's fair. What he won't
tell you is this: most organizations and office-holders automatically
endorse any half-way decent incumbent. Now that Lenett has gone off the
deep-end with nuclear attacks and dirty tricks, many of those endorsers
probably wish they could take it back. They should renounce those
endorsements, denounce Lenett, and repudiate his Republican Tea Party
tactics--for the good of Maryland, the Democratic Party and their own
reputations. Still it's impressive to see how many established
organizations, legislators, unions and newspapers endorsing a
challenger. It shows two things: Roger Manno is an especially good
challenger, and Mike Lenett is an unusually bad incumbent. Ask the
endorsers, and--if they're honest--they'll admit they're forced by their
rules to back any half-way decent incumbent. That's just the way many
play the game. It's interesting to note that none of the rubber-stamp
gang endorsed Jamie Raskin before the primary in 2006, but they all
scrambled to get on his bandwagon after he won the primary. Expect the
same to happen this year in the Manno vs. Lenett contest.
With that in mind, it's all the more remarkable that so many unions,
elected officials, and leading organizations endorsed Roger Manno
including: The Washington Post, The Gazette, Del. Hank Heller, and
Former Sen. Len Teitelbaum, Del. Adrienne Mandel, and Del. Carol
Petzold, County Councilwoman Valerie Ervin, Chair of the Education
Committee, State Delegate Sue Hecht, Chair of the Maryland Green Caucus,
State Delegate Brian Feldman, Chair of the Montgomery County House
Delegation, State Delegate Susan Lee, Vice-Chair of the Montgomery
County House Delegation, State Delegate Ana Sol Gutierrez, Joint
Committee on Children, Youth and Families, State Delegate Aisha
Braveboy, Vice-Chair of the Maryland Legislative Black Caucus, Mrs.
Cherri Branson, Esq. Chair of the African American Democratic Club of
Montgomery County, MCGEO--the United Food and Commercial Workers (UFCW)
Local 1994/Municipal County Government Employee Organization,
Progressive Neighbors, NARAL Pro-Choice Maryland, Montgomery Green
Democrats, Montgomery County Public School Retiree Association (MCPSRA),
Coalition of Asian Pacific American Democrats (CAPAD-MD), Montgomery
County Volunteer Fire and Rescue Association (MCVFRA), Montgomery County
Youth Slate, Hispanic Democratic Club of Montgomery County (HDC), and
dozens of other unions and organizations. See:
http://www.rogermanno.com/contact/index.cfm?Fuseaction=contact
These endorsements all buck the "back the incumbent" habit. It helps
that Manno would never resort to push polls or sponsor bills to
undermine environmental protection. Roger Manno is a progressive we can
trust to do the right thing when people are watching, in the back rooms,
all the time, every day. We can trust Roger Manno to serve the public
interest--not special interests. That any challenger could rack up so
many key and important endorsements says a lot about how legislators in
Annapolis and Rockville and leaders in District 19--as well as many
concerned Maryland voters and groups--see this contest. NARAL Pro-Choice
Maryland and Progressive Maryland among others took endorsements away
from Lenett and gave them to Manno, because Manno stood with them while
Lenett let them down. It's hard to not get an endorsement as an
incumbent, so each one Manno won is a failing grade for the incumbent
and a huge vote of confidence for the challenger whose leadership
through teamwork better fits District 19, Montgomery County, and
Annapolis. Advantage: Manno.
Lenett and his supporters claim he is an effective legislator, but
that's not what those who work with him and cover him in Annapolis say.
Here are some of the quotes describing Sen. Lenett's lack of
effectiveness: "Colleague problems ... A bill sponsored by him is often
the kiss of death ... Maniacal and untrustworthy ... Doesn't know how to
play in the sandbox." While there were a few positive quotes as well,
the Gazette article took those into account and still named Sen. Lenett
one of the bottom ten least effective legislators in the entire General
Assembly--including the Republicans who are in the minority in both
houses and on every committee. See:
http://www.gazette.net/thelist/repinfo.php?id=102
By contrast, Roger Manno achieved remarkable success on bills and
reforms benefiting Maryland on healthcare, employment, access to
prescription medicines for seniors, non-discrimination, organic farming,
protecting seniors from fraud, and--this is critically
important--earning the respect of his colleagues. That's why the Post
and the Gazette and many key legislators and organizations endorsed
Manno over Lenett in this contest. Clear advantage: Manno.
Lenett and his defenders claim he is an environmental superstar, but the
record shows this isn't so. In 2008, Lenett's SB 710 delayed protections
for the Chesapeake Bay--and we cannot focus on this fact too
extensively. Sen. Lenett also voted against Sen. Brian Frosh's
legislation to fine Bay polluters who violated the law Sen. Lenett
delayed. That doesn't sound like an environmental champion. Lenett's
supporters try to excuse his anti-Bay, pro-Proctor & Gamble bill by
contending other states were going to enact similar legislation later
on. So what? Maryland had already passed strong legislation. What other
states do about the Bay should never govern what Maryland does. Maryland
is exceptionally reliant on, and therefore we are exceptionally
responsible for the health of the Chesapeake Bay. Furthermore, we in
Maryland expect the best from our lawmakers, and set a high standard
accordingly.
As The Washington Post reported: "Sen. Brian E. Frosh (D-Montgomery)
said that pushing the effective date of the ban from January 2010 to
July 2010 would 'add up to 15,000 pounds of phosphates to Bay waters.'
'Phosphates are particularly pernicious because they end up stored in
sediments,' wrote Frosh, who sponsored legislation last year authorizing
the ban. 'Once in the Bay, the phosphates resulting from [the pending
bill] will be available for years to fuel the algal blooms that each
summer day destroy oxygen in the Bay's deep waters and threaten
underwater grasses in the shallows.' The bill allowing the delay,
sponsored by Sen. Michael G. Lenett (D-Montgomery), passed the Senate 25
to 22 after heavy lobbying from Proctor & Gamble, one of the affected
companies. The margin in the House of Delegates was far more
comfortable, 105 to 33. Lenett agreed to sponsor the bill at the request
of the industry, which is seeking to align the date of Maryland's ban
with those of other states with similar legislation." Please see:
"Frosh: Veto Phosphate Ban Delay"
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/annapolis/2008/04/frosh_veto_phosphate_ban_delay.html
Should Marylanders limit ourselves to what other states do? That's what
Sen. Lenett says when it comes to protecting the Bay and the countless
jobs that rely on a thriving Chesapeake. Maryland is the state most
reliant on the Bay. Sen. Lenett's bill helped a few big corporations
keep polluting the Bay. Lenett and his supporters say he authored
another bill made up for this, but we know better. That fertilizer
phosphates bill was Sen. Brian Frosh's. The same Sen. Frosh who spelled
out the damage Lenett's pro-P&G bill caused. If Lenett had just left
well enough alone, we'd have benefited from both of Frosh's bills--the
one Sen. Lenett undermined and the one Lenett claims was his. By
contrast, whenever a Manno bill passes, we're better off. With a Lenett
bill, it's a big (Proctor &) Gamble. Clear advantage Manno.
Once a politician starts siding with big out-of-state special interests
against Montgomery County and Maryland--as Lenett chooses to do--where
does it end? Will Sen. Lenett tell us it's OK for Montgomery County
Maryland schools to be the same as Montgomery Alabama's? Will he try to
roll back protections for home-owners facing the threat of foreclosure?
Will he help powerful out-of-state interests turn back the clock on our
living wage and safety standards? Hopefully after this Tuesday we won't
have to risk Lenett reversing hard-won progress--not if District 19
Democrats nominate Roger Manno to keep working for the people of
Maryland. No wonder Lenett is desperate to change the subject from the
issues to hypocritical and outlandish accusations against Roger and
Marjorie Manno.
Lenett has repeatedly made false accusations against the Mannos,
claiming that they "lied under oath" in routine amended financial
filings. This even though Lenett himself was forced to amend his own
filings several times. Mike Lenett accuses Roger Manno of "lying under
oath" for filing amended financial reports. What would he call failing
to file amendments as requested by the MD Board of Elections? Note:
according to official state records, 6 of Lenett's reports are marked
"agency requested amend" and 3 of those are not marked "Amend." Are
there 3 outstanding unamended reports, despite agency requests dating
back to 2007? Also, 3 reports are marked "Deficiency" and 1 was assessed
a Late Fee, but there is no indication the fee was paid. The Lenett
campaign amended their 2010 Pre-Primary 1 report (filed on 08/17/2010),
their 2009 Annual report (filed on 01/21/2009), their 2008 Annual report
(filed on 01/15/2008), and their 2006 Post General Report (filed on
11/28/2006). The Lenett campaign did not amend reports despite agency
requests. All information published as "Campaign Finance Report History
for Friends of Mike Lenett" by the MD Board of Elections, Please see:
http://www.mdelections.org/campaign-finance/advanced-search/detailed-committee-information?acctno=A4366
So what's the point of all the finger-pointing at Manno for also filing
amended reports when four times in less than four years, Mike Lenett
filed amended campaign finance reports--and apparently Lenett refused to
comply with requests to file at least three other amendments? Were all
these "false" reports by the Lenett campaign? Mike Lenett claimed Manno
"lied under oath...." when he filed amendments. Is that how Lenett would
describe his own actions? Lenett cited a statement from William G.
Somerville, Ethics Advisor to the General Assembly that explains,
"Delegate Manno filed incomplete ethics reports." This statement clearly
does not support Mike Lenett's accusations of a "cover-up" or "false
financial reports" or "lying" by Roger Manno as Lenett would have us
believe. In fact, Mr. Somerville explained the actual facts in this case
as follows:
"Delegate Manno's wife's employment was appropriately disclosed to the
Joint Committee on Legislative Ethics, in a timely manner and as a
matter of public record. Her employment was also disclosed to the State
Ethics Commission, and any discrepancies were appropriately corrected at
Delegate Manno's own initiation. It is not infrequent for officials to
amend their disclosure statements. Delegate Manno brought this matter to
the State Ethics Commission's attention on his own volition, and it is
clear from the record that Delegate Manno did not have any intention to
conceal information. In addition, it is my understanding from the State
Ethics Commission that Delegate Manno was not required to list any
leasehold interests that his wife may hold in which Delegate Manno does
not hold an attributable interest, which is the situation in this case."
So Del. Manno filed amendments to his financial reports. Hardly
unusual--even among candidates for State Senate from District 19. In
fact, and unlike Lenett, Manno took the initiative to do so. Lenett was
forced to respond to requests for amendments from the State Board of
Elections, and at least three times ignored the requests and refused to
file amendments. Misrepresenting Manno's compliance into "lying" and a
"cover-up" makes as much sense as implying playing bass or tending bar
is heinous and nefarious anti-American activity. Were these several
questionable filings by Lenett "false" campaign finance reports? Were
these instances of Lenett "lying under oath" to the State Board of
Elections "four times in four years?" Not according to any logical,
legal or ethical standard. However, according to the standard Lenett
imposes on others, the answer is "yes!" So, who is really "lying" about
whose ethics?
Pro-Lenett push-polling delivered attacks against Manno under the guise
of gathering information. An MPW source reported: "My wife got surveyed
yesterday. She's pretty sure it was Lenett's poll, based on the nature
of the questions. Questions focused on Lenett/Manno, no mention of
Leggett, O'Malley. Interesting follow up question on religion, which
they asked very early in the survey – not as a housekeeping matter at
the end. When she identified herself as Jewish, they asked if she
considered herself Orthodox, Conservative, Reform or Reconstructionist."
Please see:
http://maryland-politics.blogspot.com/2010/08/manno-alleges-push-poll-by-lenett.html
A Letter to the Editor published by the Gazette entitled "Turned off by
negative campaign" from Ruth Burgos-Sasscer, Silver Spring explains:
"I live in Leisure World and have attended forums where candidates for
Maryland State Senate Mike Lenett and Roger Manno have spoken, and have
been impressed with both men. I have been leaning toward Roger Manno but
until recently had not really decided for whom to vote. The other day I
was asked to participate in a telephone 'opinion poll survey,' which I
agreed to do. The first questions were about my plans to vote in the
coming Sept. 14 primary and Nov. 2 general elections. Other questions
related to whether I was leaning toward one candidate or the other and
why; and would I be influenced to support either one by the endorsements
of specific organizations or the Washington Post. I was surprised and
disturbed, however, when I was asked 'What is your religion?' and
although I responded, I was not comfortable doing so. When the
interviewer then asked 'Did you know that Roger Manno ...' and went into
a litany of negative statements about him, I immediately stopped her. I
said that I would not continue with the interview because I believed it
was a deceitful and unethical campaign tactic in support of Mike Lenett
and wanted no part of it. I also told her that her efforts were
counterproductive because she had just convinced me that Roger Manno is
by far the better candidate to represent District 19 in the Maryland
State Senate." Please see:
http://www.gazette.net/stories/08252010/montlet173358_32545.php
Blogger Keith Berner writes: "In a tight race between two candidates of
similar politics, Maryland District 19 incumbent Senator Mike Lenett has
gone where only the most shameless GOP race-baiters gather. Desperate to
hold off a serious challenge from Roger Manno, currently a D-19
delegate.... [Lenett] is riffing on the fact that Manno's legal first
name used to be 'Rajah.' Just in case the implication that Manno is a
(gasp!) Muslim out to undermine the American way of life isn't clear
enough, take a look at the graphic from Lenett's latest mailer [which
has] an uncanny resemblance the rendering of Manno's former first name
has to a terrorist demand letter!
"I have not followed Lenett or Manno closely before now, beyond knowing
that they have generally good records in Annapolis and that progressives
with more detailed knowledge are backing Manno. With Lenett's descent
into darkness, though, I need no further information about him to know
he must be beaten. I call on all District 19 voters to reject,
resoundingly, fear-mongering and racism. In fact, all Marylanders should
denounce Lenett and make clear that his behavior is completely unwelcome
here. Vote for Roger Manno on Tuesday to make abundantly clear that Mike
Lenett's politics and way of thinking have no place in Maryland." Please
see: "Lenett the Fear-Monger, Lenett the Bigot"
http://lefthandview.wordpress.com/2010/09/10/09-10-10-lenett-the-fear-monger-lennet-the-bigot/
Lenett is systematically violating every standard for political ethics.
With his extravagant imagination and taste for the melodramatic, Lenett
has a future as a writer for a show like 24. After all, Lenett has to
pay himself back the approximately half million dollars he loaned
himself trying to re-buy that Senate seat, right? Seriously! This
vicious, venomous behavior is exactly why the Gazette determined Lenett
is a "divisive force" and one of the least effective legislators in the
General Assembly. It confirms the Washington Post's reporting that
"undermines his own effectiveness" by "alienating" his colleagues.
Racist mailers, attacks on spouses, push polls, swift boat supporters,
hypocritical if not hysterical accusations and a well-deserved
reputation for ineffectiveness. Is that what we want from a State
Senator? Of course not. District 19 voters have an important decision at
the polls on Tuesday: to uphold their honor and decency by holding their
candidates to a worthy standard, or to give tacit approval to Lenett's
loathsome "win at any cost" politics.
Even those familiar with Lenett's past proclivities are shocked by this
ugly, dirty tricks campaign which reminds many area pundits of "scorched
earth" Republicans like Karl Rove, Lee Atwater, and Richard Nixon. No
wonder current and former District 19 officials including Hank Heller,
Len Teitelbaum, Carol Petzold, and Adrienne Mandel all endorsed Manno.
Manno lives up to the tradition of teamwork they established over 76
years of public service to District 19, and all point out Lenett fails
to meet this standard. Lenett's indefensible campaign tactics are
revealing what his colleagues have known for some time: Lenett is unfit
to represent District 19 and Montgomery County in the State Senate.
Why is Lenett going so negative? Theories might explain this behavior,
but cannot possibly excuse it. One holds that Lenett's or his remaining
allies have polling results showing Lenett losing, or close to losing,
with trends supporting Manno. This is certainly possible, because smart
politicians don't go negative unless they're losing, and don't go this
negative unless they're losing badly. Is Manno pulling ahead of Lenett?
Most consider Lenett too smart to do something as stupid as attacking an
opponent--much less an opponent's spouse--unless he believed he had to
do so.
Others believe Lenett has never come to grips with someone actually
challenging him for what he considers "his" seat. Leaving aside the
radical notion that the voters actually "own" the seat, this view holds
some validity based on Lenett's first public reactions to Manno's
challenge. As MPW noted at the time: "In his end of session letter,
Senator Mike Lenett (D-19) includes a second-to-last paragraph that is a
thinly-veiled slam on his possible challenger, Delegate Roger Manno,"
starting with (and these are Lenett's words). "The Democratic Party
could take a cue from the Republicans...." Please see:
http://maryland-politics.blogspot.com/2010/04/lenett-unloads-on-manno.html
Lenett questions Manno's right to run against him, even though Lenett
decided to challenge then-Senator Len Teitelbaum for the same seat while
the latter recuperated from a medical procedure. Recently, Sen.
Teitelbaum denounced Lenett's tactics, calling his "nuclear" anti-Manno
website "a terrible distortion of facts, and a clear indication of the
desperation of Lenett's campaign. This kind of extreme divisive behavior
is exactly why every former elected legislator from District 19 who has
endorsed, and the Gazette and Washington Post newspapers, have ALL
endorsed Roger Manno for State Senate."
Desperation? A sense of entitlement? Either way, no matter why Lenett is
resorting to right wing Republican politics in a Democratic Primary, one
thing is clear: this is conduct unbecoming a Democrat. Do voters in the
District 19 Democratic primary Tuesday want to support Mike Lenett,
someone who campaigns like a Republican and thinks Democrats should
"take a cue from Republicans" even as he keeps deploying the worst
Republican dirty-tricks? I'd think not. Especially because Lenett even
legislates like a Republican when he thinks he can get away with it.
Check the records, not the candidates' spin. Lenett helped polluters
keep dumping dangerous poisons in the Bay. If you prefer someone who
puts out-of-state special interests above his own voters, Lenett is the
one you want. When it comes to the environment and representing the
people of District 19, Montgomery County, and Maryland, Manno is the
man. Not just because he has a better voting record. Not just because he
puts the voters first and the special interests last. Because he has
demonstrated grace under pressure, keeping to the high road in the face
of Lenett's low-down dishonest attacks against him and even his wife
Marjorie.
As Oscar T. Ramirez wrote, "What we're seeing from our candidates this
year is really disgusting. Candidates who use fear as a political
strategy have no place in our politics. Listen to what some candidates
are saying:
Be afraid because the good light-skinned Saqib has turned into a bad
dark-skinned Saqib!
Be afraid because Roger used to be Rajah and who knows what else Rajah
has to hide!
Be afraid because Barack is a Muslim who wasn't born in this country and
doesn't share our American values!
Oh, wait. That is what the Tea Party is saying about President Obama. Do
those tactics sound familiar? I hope voters on Tuesday will think about
what Bill Clinton said a few years ago: 'If one candidate is trying to
scare you, and the other one is trying to get you to think. If one
candidate is appealing to your fears, and the other one is appealing to
your hope. You better vote for the person who wants you to think and
hope.'" Please see:
http://maryland-politics.blogspot.com/2010/09/how-to-blow-up-mailbox.html?showComment=1284164333447#c6858616559308001238
In conclusion, District 19 Democrats have a clear choice for State
Senate on Tuesday. They can vote for Roger Manno's leadership through
teamwork and a hard-working, accomplished and ethical legislator they
can be proud of. Or they can go along with a push-polling,
swift-boating, spouse-attacking, race-baiting, Proctor & Gambling,
special-interest-serving, hypocritical-accusation-spewing,
truth-twisting, colleague-alienating, Bay-polluting, seat-buying,
ineffective, divisive, incumbent who's embarrassed them before and will
let them down again. The clear choice in this contest is Roger Manno.
