What does Stangler have against Smith???

[dhyatt]

On Wednesday of this week (9/21), I headed off to lunch with my wife (we meet for lunch every Wednesday, secret to a happy marriage ;-) ). Anyway, we were headed to Barry's Cafe in Swfit Creek and while traveling down Lily Atkins (off of Lochmere Dr), my eye caught this...

http://carypolitics.org/images/Jack_Signs_Pic1.jpg

I thought it was sort of strange so I took a closer look:

http://carypolitics.org/images/Jack_Signs_Pic2.jpg

I was kind of annoyned having seen such child's play before and after lunch I drove along SE Cary Parkway between Lochmere Dr & Holly Springs Rd. I found the following in a couple of different locations:

http://carypolitics.org/images/Jack_Signs_Pic3.jpg

http://carypolitics.org/images/Jack_Signs_Pic4.jpg

http://carypolitics.org/images/Jack_Signs_Pic5.jpg


What does Curt Stangler have against Jack Smith???

Anybody know or care to comment?

For those of you that may not know, I'm informally helping Jack a bit and I re-positioned these signs and fixed a couple of other candidate's signs in the process.

[Wuptdo]

Adminhyatt wrote:
What does Curt Stangler have against Jack Smith???

Cause Jack is backing Bill Flecther for School Board????
or
Some anti-Jack squad member doing this, but using Curt's signs for re-direction purposes???

Curt is a straight up dude, so I don't think he would do this or approve of anyone doing this with his signs.

that's my 2 cents.....

Wuptdo B-)

[dhyatt]

Adminhyatt wrote:
What does Curt Stangler have against Jack Smith???

Cause Jack is backing Bill Flecther for School Board????
or
Some anti-Jack squad member doing this, but using Curt's signs for re-direction purposes???

Curt is a straight up dude, so I don't think he would do this or approve of anyone doing this with his signs.

that's my 2 cents.....

Wuptdo B-)

Since I know Jack is certainly NOT backing Fletcher and I agree with you about Stangler being a stright up guy, what's the logical conclusion here?

[Wuptdo]

Admin Hyatt wrote:
Since I know Jack is certainly NOT backing Fletcher and I agree with you about Stangler being a stright up guy, what's the logical conclusion here?

I will go with answer B.

Some anti-Jack Smith squad member (political operative) is doing this, but using Curt's signs for re-direction purposes??? (Cause till yesterday, I haven't seen a Bill Flecther sign anywhere)

However, input would really be appreciated from other CP members.

Wuptdo B-)

[KellyM]

Don,



Hey Don, Your "logical" explanation of Jack's signs being covered up by Stangler's is not logical at all - and we don't appreciate the inference. John is a stand up guy too and would NOT do this. You do not even know half of the story and I am not going to explain here, because it would embarrass Jack Smith. However, John's signs were up BEFORE Jack's - John had nothing to do with this. In fact, John told all people helping him with his campaign that if they see this happening, to stop and fix Jack's signs! Also, you are not just indirectly helping Jack - be honest. Oh yeah, and unbiased. Thanks, Kelly Musico

[kellyc]

Don,



Hey Don, Your "logical" explanation of Jack's signs being covered up by Stangler's is not logical at all - and we don't appreciate the inference. John is a stand up guy too and would NOT do this. You do not even know half of the story and I am not going to explain here, because it would embarrass Jack Smith. However, John's signs were up BEFORE Jack's - John had nothing to do with this. In fact, John told all people helping him with his campaign that if they see this happening, to stop and fix Jack's signs! Also, you are not just indirectly helping Jack - be honest. Oh yeah, and unbiased. Thanks, Kelly Musico

I dont see John's name mentioned once in this thread, except by you. Hyatt didnt make any logical conclusion, Wuptdo made the anti-jack statement. These sign quibbles are worse than kids fighting over candy.

[bobo]

KellyM wrote:

Also, you are not just indirectly helping Jack - be honest.

Ouch! 8-} >:)

What has Jack done to win your favor Mr. DonH.? :-? ~o)

Just call me curious. :wink:

[bobo]

Kellyc wrote:

These sign quibbles are worse than kids fighting over candy.


As an outsider looking in, I have to agree with you there Kelly. :wink:

[dhyatt]

KellyM wrote:

Also, you are not just indirectly helping Jack - be honest.

Ouch! 8-} >:)

What has Jack done to win your favor Mr. DonH.? :-? ~o)

Just call me curious. :wink:

I am helping Jack informally with a few pictures and general campaign advice. Nothing more, nothing less. He didn't have to "win my favor". He simply asked for a little help and since he's always been straight with me, I had no reason to turn him down.

[Wuptdo]

Kelly wrote:
Wuptdo made the anti-jack statement.
Wuptdo wrote:

Some anti-Jack Smith squad member (political operative) is doing this, but using Curt's signs for re-direction purposes??? (Cause till yesterday, I haven't seen a Bill Flecther sign anywhere)
Yep, I admit it, I wrote it. However, I tried to write it as a netural "statement of fact," as a possible cause to the placement of signs. The proof is in the pictures.

Wuptdo B-)

[kellyc]

Wup..

I never thought you inferred anyone or anything really. Every politician has an anti-crowd. Goes with the territory.

[KellyM]

It is what it is. So it was "implied" that the Harvilla campaign is doing this, just trying to set the record straight! Don took the time to take the pictures of the signs and start the issue. So do all of you have something against the other side trying to defend what is being implied?? One of the signs, I personally placed. It was the only sign in that area. Jack or his volunteers came along later and put Jack's sign up with John's. Not our fault they didn't place it in a location that looked favorable to Jack!

[kellyc]

Who implied it? Only you mentioned John's name..in fact I know nothing about Curt Stangler...but from the pictures I would have guessed it was one of his people that put it there. In fact the title of the thread is

What does Curt Stangler have against Smith???

[KellyM]

Kellyc if you feel that "These sign quibbles are worse than kids fighting over candy." Then why do you keep posting to this issue? Whether you or anyone else wants to admit it, we all know what Don was getting at when he took the pictures and made the post. At Don's own admission he is "in-directly" helping Jack's campaign. So why wouldn't he try to help Jack out by taking these pictures and making this post? All "in-directly" means is that Don is not getting paid for directly helping Jack. So is there anything so wrong about someone else defending an implication? The Harvilla campaign is not behind this, I can only assume that it is someone who does not support Jack.

[kellyc]

Kellyc if you feel that "These sign quibbles are worse than kids fighting over candy." Then why do you keep posting to this issue?

Because I am amazed at how worked up people get over these pieces of cardboard.

The Harvilla campaign is not behind this, I can only assume that it is someone who does not support Jack.

Personally thats all you needed to say...I take your word for it. You said John's signs were up first, and its true. You really didnt need to defend him or anyone else, or point or accuse anyone of anything else. Like Wup said, the proof is in the pictures.

[KellyM]

I didn't accuse anyone else, I implied it!

[dhyatt]

Kellyc if you feel that "These sign quibbles are worse than kids fighting over candy." Then why do you keep posting to this issue? Whether you or anyone else wants to admit it, we all know what Don was getting at when he took the pictures and made the post. At Don's own admission he is "in-directly" helping Jack's campaign. So why wouldn't he try to help Jack out by taking these pictures and making this post? All "in-directly" means is that Don is not getting paid for directly helping Jack. So is there anything so wrong about someone else defending an implication? The Harvilla campaign is not behind this, I can only assume that it is someone who does not support Jack.

It's fascinating you became so defensive but to put an end to this (since it's going nowhere fast), the "logical conclusion" is that someone putting up signs for Curt Stangler obviously doesn't like Jack. That's fine. Maybe now, the sign nonsense will stop.

[KellyM]

It's fascinating to me that you posted this issue to begin with Don. Why shouldn't I be defensive about this? For those of you that don't know - an implication is not naming names. I didn't imply anything earlier, I simply brought your implication into the open by stating that you implied it was John. If you want to imply that the Harvilla campaign is doing this to Jack's signs then you should expect someone to defend the implication. That's all there is to it. If I weren't attacked for defending this implication, it wouldn't give the appearance of being so defensive! What is ironic is that I've read on this site so many times criticisms by regular posters for those who won't identify themselves by posting. This is why. If I want to read but not post to every issue, I'm condemned, but when I reply, I'm attacked, and am defensive.

[dhyatt]

It's fascinating to me that you posted this issue to begin with Don. Why shouldn't I be defensive about this? For those of you that don't know - an implication is not naming names. I didn't imply anything earlier, I simply brought your implication into the open by stating that you implied it was John. If you want to imply that the Harvilla campaign is doing this to Jack's signs then you should expect someone to defend the implication. That's all there is to it. If I weren't attacked for defending this implication, it wouldn't give the appearance of being so defensive! What is ironic is that I've read on this site so many times criticisms by regular posters for those who won't identify themselves by posting. This is why. If I want to read but not post to every issue, I'm condemned, but when I reply, I'm attacked, and am defensive.

Don't take it personally. It's a trial by fire that everyone goes through. Just ask Dharma, or bobo, or kellyc, or Rono, or StanN or.... the list goes on and on. Now you're here, we know who you are you can b!tch all you want. Sometimes you'll be supported, sometimes you'll get challenged. Life goes on.

[dhyatt]

I didn't accuse anyone else, I implied it!

BTW - I'm basically a fair guy. You take pictures of questionably placed and/or torn up signs and I'll post them here. We can even do a poll on whether or not signs make a hill of beans difference in a campaign.

[dhyatt]

I've spoken with Russell Capps and all the mysterious sign placement is simply an act of GOD. I guess we can call this case closed ;-)

[ChrisD]

I thought the sings were not allowed in Cary?

Chris D

[visitor]

On Wednesday of this week (9/21), I headed off to lunch with my wife (we meet for lunch every Wednesday, secret to a happy marriage ;-) ). Anyway, we were headed to Barry's Cafe in Swfit Creek and while traveling down Lily Atkins (off of Lochmere Dr), my eye caught this.
I don't know who is doing it, but whoever it is, I wish him well because I think Jack Smith is a fat looser who does not belong on the CTC. Jack Smith is so far into Ernie Mac's pockets that he has pocket lint all over him.

Don, I'm surprised that you can't see thru Jack Smith.

A New Hill resident being dumped on by Jack Smith and 3 other CTC members

[Laurie]

I am helping Jack informally with a few pictures and general campaign advice. Nothing more, nothing less. He didn't have to "win my favor". He simply asked for a little help and since he's always been straight with me, I had no reason to turn him down.

Uh..... You sure there's not anything else you'd like to include?

[dhyatt]

I am helping Jack informally with a few pictures and general campaign advice. Nothing more, nothing less. He didn't have to "win my favor". He simply asked for a little help and since he's always been straight with me, I had no reason to turn him down.

Uh..... You sure there's not anything else you'd like to include?

Sorry, forgot since I haven't actually done anything yet. I'm helping (or may actually wind up doing) his treasurer work.

[Cathy]

Kellyc if you feel that "These sign quibbles are worse than kids fighting over candy." Then why do you keep posting to this issue? Whether you or anyone else wants to admit it, we all know what Don was getting at when he took the pictures and made the post. At Don's own admission he is "in-directly" helping Jack's campaign. So why wouldn't he try to help Jack out by taking these pictures and making this post? All "in-directly" means is that Don is not getting paid for directly helping Jack. So is there anything so wrong about someone else defending an implication? The Harvilla campaign is not behind this, I can only assume that it is someone who does not support Jack.

It's fascinating you became so defensive but to put an end to this (since it's going nowhere fast), the "logical conclusion" is that someone putting up signs for Curt Stangler obviously doesn't like Jack. That's fine. Maybe now, the sign nonsense will stop.

I have a feeling that there are a lot of people in Jack's district that "doesn't like Jack" these days. It could have been anyone of many people who rearranged the sign placement.
And BTW Don H., it doesn't look like the most innocent of intentions for this complaint about the sign hanky panky to be coming from you when you are helping Jack's campaign.

Cathy

[bobo]

dhyatt wrote:

I am helping Jack informally with a few pictures and general campaign advice. Nothing more, nothing less. He didn't have to "win my favor". He simply asked for a little help and since he's always been straight with me, I had no reason to turn him down.

Laurie wrote:

Uh..... You sure there's not anything else you'd like to include?

dhyatt wrote:

Sorry, forgot since I haven't actually done anything yet. I'm helping (or may actually wind up doing) his treasurer work.

Oops :oops: :lol:

[Laurie]

I have no problem with bringing up the hiding of a candidate's signs. You don't give up your right to comment on this or any other race just because you are helping someone's campaign. If someone is putting signs up in front of Jack's, bring it up.

I just had a problem with this:
I am helping Jack informally with a few pictures and general campaign advice. Nothing more, nothing less. He didn't have to "win my favor". He simply asked for a little help and since he's always been straight with me, I had no reason to turn him down.

And I didn't even bring up Jack's website. I was trying to remember who helped with that.

[dhyatt]

I have no problem with bringing up the hiding of a candidate's signs. You don't give up your right to comment on this or any other race just because you are helping someone's campaign. If someone is putting signs up in front of Jack's, bring it up.

I just had a problem with this:
I am helping Jack informally with a few pictures and general campaign advice. Nothing more, nothing less. He didn't have to "win my favor". He simply asked for a little help and since he's always been straight with me, I had no reason to turn him down.

And I didn't even bring up Jack's website. I was trying to remember who helped with that.

No problem. I'm not trying to hide anything. Jack's website content was provided strictly by him. I advised him on how to get the content uploaded but that's about it as far as that went. I offered to update the look and feel since I think it's a little raw but he didn't think it was necessary. I'm not trying to be cagey here but I'm not going to come out and endorse anybody one way or another on this site. I'm providing help as time allows and that isn't a whole lot these days :-( Any other questions? Anybody?

Oh - and I'm helping him with sign repair at 10pm tonight. We'll fix others if we run across any damage.

[bobo]

dhyatt wrote:

Oh - and I'm helping him with sign repair at 10pm tonight. We'll fix others if we run across any damage.


I'm sure Jack appreciates having a right-hand man. Sounds like you and he are solid. :-D

Out of respect for you and your close relationship with the man, I'll keep my opinion of Jack to myself. Heck, since I don't vote in Cary, my opinion really doesn't matter one way or the other anyway. :)>-

[dhyatt]

dhyatt wrote:

Oh - and I'm helping him with sign repair at 10pm tonight. We'll fix others if we run across any damage.


I'm sure Jack appreciates having a right-hand man. Sounds like you and he are solid. :-D

Out of respect for you and your close relationship with the man, I'll keep my opinion of Jack to myself. Heck, since I don't vote in Cary, my opinion really doesn't matter one way or the other anyway. :)>-

Hey now! - Your opinion matters to me! :-) I did quite a chuckle out of JohnB's blog entry though...

http://www.blogomonster.com/johnb/26662/

BTW - We ran across 1/2 dz places where signs had been taken down because of mowing, vandalism and such. We decided to simply collect Jack's signs and not put them back up, leaving John's, Curt's, Mike's and at least one Bill Fletcher sign. We finished up about 1am and Jack tells me that in at least 3 or 4 of those spots, the Harvilla signs are back up. I guess they went out after us or reaalllyyy early this morning. Either way, he has some dedicated sign people!