Document Actions
Tues: Oh, for cryin' out loud....
posted at 2007-10-09 23:07 | Last modified 2007-11-27 23:55
Richard Moore campaign manager Jay Reiff sure knows how to liven up a slow news day. Maybe it’s those bothersome poll numbers yesterday that show a widening lead for Moore’s opponent Bev Perdue. Or maybe he’s still buzzing from the CNBC love.
Whatever the reason, Reiff was back on the warpath today with a renewed flurry of accusations that Perdue has fudged her bio on everything from her father’s occupation to her employment history to her PhD – even her small business ownership. Here’s the Moore campaign email on the topic, and here’s the attached details.
The backstory
Last week, Perdue campaign spokesguy David Kochman contacted me to talk about the resume question – i.e., whether, as the Moore campaign claims, Perdue padded her 1991 resume to make herself more politically attractive to teachers.
Kochman says no. He says someone – maybe Perdue, maybe a staffer – made a mistake: the teaching description listed under 1978 belonged with her educational work from 1969-1973, but it was misplaced on her ‘91 resume.
(If you actually read the 1991 resume all the way through, the theory’s plausible. The description makes NO sense where it’s placed, and the mistake doesn’t persist on later versions of her CV.)
Still and all, the person who makes a mistake on a resume bears the burden of proving it WAS a mistake. So far, no proof - although Kochman insists the CV Reiff's been passing around may have been just a draft. Reiff says it wasn’t.
Reiff probably should’ve stopped while he was ahead. Most of the rest of his email deals in very shaky accusations. Like this one:
"In a 2007 speech to NARAL, Perdue said she taught public school after earning her PhD and implied that she taught in Craven County.
Perdue told NARAL, “[Perdue’s parents] preached education as the difference maker, and I took it to heart and made them proud when their daughter earned her PhD. I went on to become a public school teacher, and a geriatrics director at a community hospital in Craven County.” [Speech to NARAL, 4-17-07]"
Oh, come on. That “implication” would be a stretch for even the most grammatically impaired audience.
There they go again
Later this evening, Perdue spokesman David Kochman sent out this response, “setting the record straight.” Most of it’s helpful. Some, not so much. In fact, it’s raised other questions that are potentially far more damaging than a random resume mistake.
According to Dome, the small business which Kochman says is half-owned by Perdue actually lost its business license in 2004 due to what looks like tax problems. So now you know what we’ll all be talking about for the next two weeks.
To be totally honest, I’m wondering why we’re talking about any of this manufactured BS stuff. Even though I’m not the gambling type, I’d be more than willing to bet that no one outside the Beltline cares about this entire debate.
So here’s an novel idea for BOTH candidates: Maybe you could try talking about actual issues. You know, the stuff your constituents care about – like taxes, services, the cost of living, gas prices, health insurance, whatever. Trust me, the voters would thank you. And so would your press corps.
Déjà vu
Speaking of Dome, Ryan Teague Beckwith has suddenly discovered that someone’s selling Fred Smith’s book on Amazon. Gee, can’t imagine why that sounds so familiar...
Update: Ryan sends an belated hat tip, and his apologies -- graciously accepted, thanks!
Comments? Drop me a line.
