Phillips campaign continues misrepresentation

Hilariously, the Patricia Phillips for Senate campaign has updated its website with an item entitled “Setting the Record Straight.”

As you can see, Phillips continues to erroneously refer to a 2005 Loudoun Times-Mirror editorial as an “Equality Loudoun article in praise of Andrews”, suggesting that it was our statement. For some reason, she thinks that a screen shot of our page before we added an update exposing her false attribution provides some sort of defense of her behavior. I have no idea why. When her dishonesty was brought to our attention, of course we updated the page with that information. She was lying to the public about our organization.

For the record, Andrews was entirely correct to characterize Phillip’s behavior as “dirty tricks and lies” in his own mailing – but we don’t think much of his characterization of our alleged “praise” as a “slanderous statement.” Feel free to roll your eyes at this; I know I do.

Again, Patricia: Grown-ups admit when they have done something wrong. They do not dig themselves a deeper hole trying to justify their behavior.

This entry was posted in Commentary and tagged , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

12 Responses to Phillips campaign continues misrepresentation

  1. Jonathan says:

    I’m speechless. What is the matter with her?

  2. Jonathan says:

    In keeping with Patricia’s failure to abide by the Ten Commandments (Thou shalt not bear false witness), her on-line campaigner appears to have forgotten the golden rule and is referring to me as “Gayman”. I think the local AGI is losing it.

  3. Pingback: Equality Loudoun » Good and ugly

  4. Oh grow a sense of humor, Jonathan.

  5. Russell says:

    her on-line campaigner appears to have forgotten the golden rule and is referring to me as “Gayman”. – link from Jonathon’s comment above.

    “Note: Do not say “Gayman.” It has been determined to be homophobic.” –

    Joe, I do not see the corelation.

    If someone calls you “Straightman” (presumably), is that hetero-phobic?

  6. No Russell, it would not be anything at all. That’s the point. Jonathan knows me and he knows he is a bit of a nut case if he thinks I have anything against him. So he should take a pill, is my point. Then, maybe we could continue conversing and toss the occasional joke in either direction.

    Also, I think it is a tad paranoid to think I’m some kind of running shill for the Phillips campaign.

  7. David says:

    I guess it kind of depends on your definition of “shill.” Perhaps we could compromise with the terms “enthusiastic campaigner” and “endorser” (an interesting list, wouldn’t you say?) Just sayin’.

  8. David says:

    I believe Russell may have been calling attention to the fact that no one called Joe “homophobic.” Or a “running shill,” for that matter. Take a deep breath, and slowly back away from the thesaurus.

  9. I am sure I will be campaigning for her, but haven’t since the 19th of May. I missed the episode you all have been hammering on – never saw the promotional piece in question. I found her a lot more solid on fixing the illegal immigration problem.

  10. Jonathan says:

    Joe, Now that you’ve seen Patricia’s behavior over this “episode” (your word), you’d continue to campaign for her? Would you ask her to correct the record?

  11. Oh yeah. All I care about is what she would do in Richmond on legislation like the seven or eight bills I really care about which should have been let out of committee and passed this past session.

    But I will make it a point to find out what the outrage is on this issue.

  12. Pingback: Equality Loudoun » Gone too far?