Well, that didn't take long. Yesterday morning, Ken Petrini and I both told you that Lehigh County Commissioner candidates Hillary Kwiatek (running in District 5 against incumbent Glenn Eckhart) and Jeanne McNeill (running in District 1 against Tom Creighton) had both filed their pre-election campaign finance reports (see them here). That's a good thing. But in those reports, they fail to note $72,000 that Executive Don Cunningham had set aside so they could do three mailers each. That's a bad thing.By late yesterday afternoon, both McNeill and Kwiatek had amended their reports to note Cunningham's generous assistance. Kwiatek and McNeill both tell me they never received the necessary invoices until Friday, the deadline for filing. McNeill's report had already been filed two days earlier, and Kwiatek's was already finished when she got the news.
Kwiatek has already stated she "would never intentionally deceive or mis-report information on these reports." For her part, McNeill tells me "I have always worked hard to maintain openness and honesty. I received the info on Friday and my report had been finished and turned in by Wednesday. I did not realise that I could amend it to reflect the change. I thought I had to wait until the next report to do so. Thanks to your column, I was made aware of this. I was unable to add it to my first report because I did not have the figures in hand and did not want to guess at something so important. If you ask anyone that knows me, they will tell you that I am an upstanding decent person who always does what is right. I apologize to anyone that felt it was not handled in the correct way."
I believe them both. If they were interested in playing games, they would have simply waited until the next filing period.
Their reports, as amended, reveal that Executive Don Cunningham is their chief benefactor. Some of you may feel this makes them rubber stamps incapable of independent oversight. Others may think that all this means is that Cunningham recognizes two good people who understand and will help his agenda over the next four years.
What's important, from my perspective, is that you know the county exec is financing these candidates. You can draw your own conclusions.
32 comments:
wow... somebody pulls out the jewish liberal and secular humanist card in one shot. this sounds like a something a neo fascist conservative like Echkert would plant. So much for his "Christian" values. He sounds more like a fascist to me.
according to her facebook profile, Kwiatek is Jewish, not a secular humanist. the first person's comments markt the first time in a long time I've seen anti-semetic sentiments creep into local politics. truly shameful.
Unlikely that this was Eckhart- he cannot spell that well.
I do not think Hillary is from New York. I think she originates from Maryland. She has lived in the Lehigh Valley for at least 10 years now, probably longer.
I think Anon 12:23 should do his homework before spouting off. His/Her anti-semetic remarks are uncalled for and unnecessary.
Hillary is a good person. She works to help the community and will continue to do so as a commissioner.
Hillary is an honest person. So I believe her when she says she did not get the paperwork until Friday.
No matter the party, they're always sorry and willing to make it right...
...when they get caught.
Nice job, BOH.
I looked and looked at that first comment, and to be honest, I don't think it is anti-Semitic at all. I think the complaint being made about Hillary is that she is not Jewish enough and that A-town's Jewish community is more concerned about power than helping people. I actually thought the writer of the comment was Jewish, especially with the remark about mezuzah on her door.
I also don't think it is all that relevant.
If I do detect any anti-Semitism, misogyny or racism at any of the canddates, I will delete it. I will delete the first comment if I can be persuaded it really is anti-Semitic.
bernie, jewish special interests is code... tied directly to the "jewish media". it's a stereotype and is shameful. that you don't see it as such is telling.
If it were just "Jewish special interests," I'd agree, but this is "Jewish special interests in Allentown." I suspected this was a reference to something else, perhaps an implication about the Allentown JCC or something. I got the impression it was a local criticism and from someone on the inside.
I appreciate your sensitivity to this issue, and I may be off base, but I do not get the anti-Semitism. I am very sensitive to that sort of thing, and will ask some friends what they think.
bernie, in the past you have accused me of being oblivious to anti=Semitic statements. believe me, comment number 1 is. "glatt" refers to a specific form of kosher food. what business is it of 12:23 if a jew is kosher or not? what is relevant about her religion? jewish special interests?
MM, I will delete the comment immediately. In the past,I have considered things anti-Semitic and you've told me I'm over-reacting. Thank you for your comment.
I have deleted a comment that has been identified as anti-Semitic, and apologize for my own ignorance in not realizing it. I actually thought the comment, which was really irrelevant, was written by a Jewish person who had some complaints about what is going on in the Allentown Jewish community.
In the past, I have often thought remarks might be anti-Jewish slams, and MM has told me I am being ridiculous. The fact that he is so certain about the anti-Semitic nature of the comment just deleted is very telling to me.
I apologize to one and all.
Bernie I must disagree. The comments by Anon, 12:23 AM, are subtle as are most comments that tend to identify perceived "faults" of Jews. Unfortunately, we, having been subjected to that rhetoric most of our lives, seem to not recognize them for what they are, racist.
Bernie even when commenters make even less subtle comments then these about other minorities, we immediately recognize them as racist.
I guess over the years Jews have gotten a tough skin. But was is right is right.
Bob Romancheck
good call bernie. the term "jewish special interests" is akin to "liberal special interests" in that it is designed to elicite an emotional response. Liberal special interests tick off people who hate liberals. Jewish special interests tick off people who hate Jews.
Coded language is subtle to most people b/c the words don't mean much to the average person. However, certain codes set of certain people. That wouldn't think twice about it says that you don't think in those terms (which is good). But this one was certainly aimed at an audience that views Jews in a certain light and i think we all know the ugly history associated with such thinking.
This was not that hard a call ohare.
Your buddy Angle is a proven anti-semite and bigot. I guess he has desensitized you to anti-semitism.
This has nothing to do w/ Ron or anyone but me. It was my call, and I blew it.
Sorry, but I'd need rock hard proof before allowing something like that to stand, and even if it's true, it is really irrelevant.
Dear Mr. O'Hare,
Your analysis of my comment was about 99% accurate!
The other commentors are completely wrong and trying to make something out of nothing.
Yes, I am Jewish and Glatt is Hillary's maiden name. I would sign my name to this post but you can see how stupidly some people react to the truth.
In my opinion taking down my post creates more the appearance of antisemitism that having left it up.
Thank you for seeing clearly.
Anon 12:23
Anon 12:23, aka Anon 11:01,
Wow! I am shocked to have had it right, especially after hearing from Michael Molovinsky and a few others. I'll tell you that it disturbed Ms. Kwiatek, too, and I felt pretty bad about that. I'm relieved and think she will be relieved to know your comment was not intended as an anti-Semitic slur.
Ironically, i usually suggest something is anti-Semitic and MM tells me I'm nuts. I knew that "Glatt" is Hillary's maiden name, although it is also a kosher food.
I looked for your comment so I could put it back up, but I'm afraid it is completely gone.
Thanks for clarifying things.
bernie, may i suggest you seek opinion from your other jewish acquaintances. tell them the comment said
1. she's a jew but eats pork
2. it claims she will support the special interest of the allentown jews at the expense of the poor.
MM,
I don't really need to seek opinions from other Jewish sources concerning the merits of a comment I already deleted once and can no longer find. I am just glad that the writer, who himself is Jewish, had no anti-semitic intentions. Obviously, they still had that unintended effect, as indicated by your remarks. Needless to say, a candidate's religion is and should remain irrelevant. I will be more careful concerning that in the future.
Let me add that if just one Jewish person complains about the anti-Semitic nature of a comment, that's enough to merit deletion. I would hope that no one would need to tell me, as happened yesterday.
bernie, just curious, have you confirmed the identity of anon 11:01 and his/her religion or are you just accepting the new comment at face value? anon 11:01 is welcome to contact me offline (they could look me up) i will honor his/her privacy, and gladly report back here if i was mistaken.
I took this person at his/her word. The person also claims to have attended the Human Relations Comm'n dinner. It is likely this person already knows you and he/she can contact you.
Whether you are mistaken or not does not really matter. I have no desire to offend someone just because he or she belongs to a particular religion. I also have no desire to see the religion of a candidate highlighted. It's irrelevant.
then i'm confused by your comment of 11:18. if in fact ms. kwiatek and myself were offended, the original comment should have been deleted by your one criterion. in the very least that comment was completely centered on her as a jew, not being a good jew, and beholding to other jews. that should have been deleted by your second criterion. at any rate, thank you for your good intentions.
The comment was deleted and is not going back up. Religious belief is irrelevant and that is what should have guided me from the onset. Had I thought about it more carefully, we never would have reached the stage where someone could focus on what was actually said. Obviosuly, I did not think about it too carefully and was properly taken to task.
Dear Mr. Molovinsky:
My comment had to do with her character. Stop milking the "antisemitism" cow. I can say you are an antisemite because you defend Hillary. Hillary is a liberal left wing supporter of the worse kind for Obama whether or not she supported Hillary first.
Obama is the worst antisemite we have ever seen, no matter how many kosher sedars he has in the White House and no matter how much he kisses up to antisemite Rahm Emmanuel.
And who pays the price for this sir?
Who catches the bullets and the Hizbollah missiles?
Every time Bill was doing Monica and every time that Obama kisses the Saudi ass Jewish people suffer!
Who suffers? My family in Israel suffers!
They don't have the option of leaving. But you sir pretend to support Jews and Israel, when really you are the antisemite.
Anon 12:23
anon 12:23, what a complex protein you are. i don't know hillary. i do know that your comment, for what ever reason, sounded very anti-semitic. you employed both the language and stereotypes which have traditionally injured jews. most people consider me very conservative. i share your view that the current whitehouse is no friend to israel. however, i suggest that choose your words more carefully, this isn't a hasidic audience.
No, but I don't think I've ever deleted more than two or three anti-Semitic comments in three plus years. That's pretty good. Of course, my skills at seeing it may nt be as good as I thought. I think MM is probably right and we shold be careful. I am the person at fault for allowing an irrelevant comment about religion to stand.
Mr. Molovinsky,
The problem is that you profiled me according to a few key words however Mr. O'Hare understands English perfectly you could use an English reading lesson.
"i suggest that choose your words more carefully, this isn't a hasidic audience."
I chose my words carefully, you just did not read them carefully and so you came to wrong conclusions plus you lack a sense of humor. Do you have someting against Hasidic people? Oh, so you mean I should not speak the truth in front of the goyim (gentiles) because they would then they will understand the two-faced game people like you play. Sounds to me like you are saying that Hasidic people are honest, maybe that is because they follow the rules.
When a Jewish person eats pork in their private life it also means that they will pork spend in their public life. Yes, eating pork = pork spending. Take a tally Mr. Molovinsky at who in Congress supports pork spending and who keeps kosher, it should correlate to who is Jewish and who is not.
It is not the government's role to do mitzvahs and that would violate the separation of Church and State.
Mitzvahs are the personal responsibility of the Jewish people.
Anon 12:23
anon 12:23, as you know, there are those who believe that social liberalism has replaced the conservative and reform movements in judaism. i think, unfortunately, there is much truth to that.
so although we may actually share more things in common than you think, after being insulted by you in two comments now, i've had enough, thank you
Post a Comment