Uhm, so? Talk about a reach by Goldy... "Some guy with nothing to do with the campaign but knows Ed through a different job supports him!" Boy, I hope no one peripherally involved with the CBC or City have anything to do with McGinn's PAC, which I'm sure Goldy checked, right?

McGinn's "What if we had a mayor who..." mailers were the lamest mail campaign I've witnessed. They were well designed, but all they did was make me think either "Yeah! I'll vote for that guy because the current dude sure hasn't..." or "No... Not the mayor's job." (McGinn is fantastic at Attempting to Do Things That Aren't His Job. At least Cory Booker rescued dogs and put out fires. McGinn wants to be... Governor? It's unclear. But education and coal trains aren't within his scope-- sorry, fan boys.) Never ask a binary question like that. Particularly with favorables where McGinn's are.

You want to slam Murray? Let's talk about how he doesn't seem to know any people of color in Seattle. Every single mailer featured a lot of white people.

Also they used a straight white couple? Why not a gay couple with kids?

You do realize that the demographic of Seareis overwhelmingly straight and white right?

I can't imagine that many people in Seattle are unaware that Ed is pro the Gay.

Your flailing is amusing, Goldy.

@3

Yeah, that's what I noticed, too--very hetero-looking white family.

hi @1 and @2, single-issue anti-McGinn posters. Looks like @2 is still butthurt from 2009!

A real politician would be challenging RCW 84.55 the limitation on property tax.

All other answers are mere puffery.

Huh, so the new Michael King--who embezzled 1/3 of the SDCC's budget under Murray's watch and cost Ds the Senate--is the face of Murray's money bundling PAC. May not be illegal but it sure is a stupid idea--couldn't they find any other family to shill for the guy?

Huh, so the new Michael King--who embezzled 1/3 of the SDCC's budget under Murray's watch and cost Ds the Senate--is the face of Murray's money bundling PAC. May not be illegal but it sure is a stupid idea--couldn't they find any other family to shill for the guy?

Unseemly ? I consider having your Mayoral Spokesman take "time off" from being a city employee to work solely on the reelection campaign more unseemly. Unless he really doesn't have much to do with McGinn being less active as mayor.

@3 I figured he did it to show that he's also the hets' guy.
I looked all over the flyer to try to identify that happy insipid couple and couldn't. I was definitely not inspired.

@12 McGinn's guy is actually doing the ethical thing--not getting paid by the city--how is that "unseemly"? Let's see how many unethical things we can come up with about Ed Murray.
1) He double dipped from the state and got a $50,000+ a year salary (and a kick-back job) from UW for "special projects" (and another few thousand from the Port) all while voting and funding those two state entities.
2) He's been awfully silent about the only executive leadership role he's ever held b/c the ED of SDCC while Ed was chair embezzled 1/3 of the budget costing Ds the Senate.
3) Check his (and his PAC) PDC records, if he gets elected--you better watch just how many of the "people" (i.e. Tim Ceis, Dean Nielsen, Ron Sims) who gave or shilled for his campaign get jobs/"collaborative" consulting opportunities with his administration.

Oh, he did it because if he had done any campaign work without taking the vacation leave it would be incredibly easy to mess up and cause problems for the Mayor's office. I'm thinking it's unseemly that the guy's job is supposedly important for the city yet he can take time off (and I wonder just who reviews and grants the request) for an endeavor that serves the guy who usually signs his city paycheck.

Suppose the CEO of your company really likes the way you make powerpoint presentations and asked you to take a few weeks off to make powerpoint presentations for the CEO's pitch to some investors for a company he was trying to create. Would your HR department like that idea, be indifferent, and how would your coworkers feel ?

@ChefJoe--you're whacked and what you just wrote makes no sense...

Straight from my mail box to my recycling box. #wasteofmoney

@betty77, I think being called crazy by someone ranting like you do is quite the compliment. Thank you.

@ChefJoe--difference is, what I say is factually correct--look it up. Ed is a political parasite as are all of his crony friends who are looking to find work if he gets elected.

Cronyism: partiality to cronies especially as evidenced in the appointment of political hangers-on to office without regard to their qualifications.

btw, here are the facts...
ED's KICK BACK JOB (btw, the "ethic board" that oversees the ethics of state legislators is-no surprise-made up of legislators) http://seattletimes.com/html/localnews/2…
EMBEZZLED $ ON ED'S WATCH http://www.seattlemet.com/news-and-profi…
ED'S LIST OF CRONIES
http://www2.seattle.gov/ethics/eldata/fi…

@ChefJoe - taking a leave of absence to address campaign issues is a very routine and regular thing and certainly not worth criticism. We require separation of campaigns and being in office. If we didn't allow leaves of absence then elected would either have to not employ people they trusted who helped got them there, or not have those trusted and knowledgeable people help them get re-elected. Its an imperfect system and taking leaves of absence is the most honest and straightforward way of dealing with those imperfections.

@22 well put