Hixon's Fiction: Misleading claims in State Senate race
In the race to replace Democratic State Senator Tommy Moore, a recent “rebuttal” letter sent out by State Senate candidate Bill Hixon, attacked fellow candidate Shane Massey, accusing “ makes a number of misleading claims that we thought we’d check out and clarify for our readers, especially those who may be voting in that upcoming special GOP runoff election.We'd like to examine some of those claims made in Hixon's letter:
CLAIM #1: ATTACKS BY OUT OF STATE GROUPS?
It has also been brought to my attention, Mr. Massey, that you have been in communication and/or cooperation with the out-of-state funded PAC that has mailed voters false and misleading information about me in an attempt to aid your campaign against me.
THE TRUTH? As shown, the mail pieces in question cited numerous sources for their information. SCRG PAC, as identified on the mail pieces, is headquartered in Columbia, South Carolina. This complies with the requirements of state law regarding campaign conduct, as defined in Section 8-13-1354.THE TRUTH? There were six candidates in the Republican primary, not just Massey. Any damage done to Hixon could have benefitted any of the five other candidates, and no proof is presented to substantiate the claim that Massey benefitted from the mailings. In reviewing the two mail pieces in question, we saw nothing which indicated who voters should support in that race. These pieces simply discussed Hixon.
CLAIM #2: CONSULTANT MISCONDUCT?
Perhaps not coincidentally, the political consulting firm you have paid to manage your campaign has a history of using anonymous Websites to smear fellow Republicans, and just last week, national news reports revealed that your consulting firm was responsible for the anonymous site created to personally attack and spread untrue, hurtful information about Republican presidential candidate Fred Thompson.
CLAIM #3: ACCUSATIONS OF COLLUSION?
So here is my proposal: Will you promise the voters that all negative attacks against Bill Hixon will cease? Will you instruct those PACs and websites which are supporting you to end their negative attacks on your behalf?
Mr. Massey, when you’re willing to add those two conditions to your pledge — thereby making it meaningful — I will gladly join you in a symbolic affirmation of my continued commitment to run a positive campaign.
THE TRUTH? Contacting a political organization making independent expenditures, much less giving instructions, would be illegal collusion (Sec 8-13-1310 & 1314). To ask voters to judge Massey for that which he cannot control is highly misleading.
Further, would voters believe the claims of, much less want to elect, a candidate who acts to suppress the First Amendment freedom of speech of those who wish to examine politician's record?
BREAK THE LAW OR ANYTHING GOES?
Hixon’s vaguely worded offer of “symbolic affirmation” is a loaded phrase which lacks any sort of explicit promise or pledge as to how he’ll conduct his campaign. Instead of using vague language, he should state clearly if he's willing to sign a clean campaign pledge or not.
Hixon, who had previously refused to sign a clean campaign pledge, now offers to do so, but only if Massey consents to conditions that are legally impossible for him to do. What if Massey doesn’t break the law to meet Hixon’s challenge? Will Hixon consider that carte-blance to wage an “anything goes” campaign?
While nobody likes mud-slinging campaign tactics, some of which have been criticized on this blogsite 1 2, it’s disappointing that Hixon would make such an unfair challenge to Massey. We hope that he'll realize that ethical choices have to be made on an individual basis and choose to take the high road in his campaign, regardless of what others may do.
Shane Massey has a detailed “Clean Campaign Pledge” to clarify his intended campaign approach on his website and take responsibility for the conduct of his campaign, to the extent that the law allows. The voters should judge Massey’s campaign by this standard, and hold him accountable for those promises, instead of being misled by the claims made in Hixon’s letter.
From the schadenfreude of some anon and other postings, you must have hit something that hits too close to home... maybe, like a pair of lines from Firesign Theater's Shakepeares Lost Comedy, "Speak ketchup bottle for me!" "By the Great God Heniz, I bleed from 57 wounds".
Methinks Hixon doth protest too much. Remind me though, which candidate in this race is the former Dem consultant/aide, wearing the prosthetic trunk and tusks from the book store on Two Notch Road Columbia?
We on the other hand live on Two Notch Road and enjoy the bennies...
Why isn't he addressing the claims people have made about his shady property assessment instead of complaining about people getting involved in the political process?
It's the same old story, a political candidate getting righteously indignant and angry about someone bringing up something that HE DID. Those mailpieces were nails in his political coffin.
Hixon does not assess his own property, so it you have a complaint with this, you should take it up with the assessor.
Rod Shealy is right about SCRG and Rich and SCRG's shady tactics.
I don't know if I've ever seen what Rod has to say about outside groups, but we all know he used to consult video poker, which had plenty of outside mafioso cash.
Given his sense of campaign ethics, and the crappy day I'm having, please do have Rod Shealy, the paragon of political virtue, give us a lecture about ethics in politics, because I could really use a laugh right about now.
Log on to
http://stophowardrichsc.blogspot.com/ to learn about the Howard Rich/SCRG/Karen Floyd connection.
I do not live in Aiken County and, so, have not received all the neagative mailings about Hixon. However, I have watched SCRG, Rich, Floyd, and Joshua Gross very carefully. I do not like what I see.
As for Rod Shealy--he paid his fine. So, let him go on with his life unless he pulls a "Donohue."
personally, i say they're all crooks, not just the richie-rich crowd.