I was a press conference earlier this week where the president of the MRA---Missouri Republican Assembly, Dr. Scott Magill (pictured above*) severely chastised Michael Wardell for 'endorsing' Scott Eckersley. Indeed, Magill, if I understood him correctly, bandied about the term 'socialist' quite freely.
Magill was upset, as were several of the Republicans who attended Eckersley's press conference, that Wardell, a Republican was supportive of the Long / Eckersley debates. To further fuel Magill's anger, Wardell was endorsing Eckersley.
(Actually I think Magill confused supporting a debate with supporting a candidate.)
So, Dr. Magill, Jeff Wisdom endorsing Billy Long any different?
Wisdom said he would not endorse Long and then he did (SN-L August 18-"Jeff Wisdom said after the primary he would not endorse Long"). Wisdom did just what you accuse Wardell of doing, saying one thing and doing the other.
Where is your outrage now?
How about where Long said he'd debate Eckersley then said he wouldn't debate Eckersley.
Where is your outrage now?
Also at the press conference, Magill apparently couldn't differentiate between Moon, Wisdom and Wardell supporting the Eckersley/Long debates with supporting a candidate who was, gasp, not a republican.
When you 'slam' Wardell for not keeping his word, shouldn't you also 'slam' Wisdom and Long for not keeping theirs?
*I can unequivocally state that Dr. Magill will never give me a digital prostate examination!
No comments:
Post a Comment