Rishell calls Del. Jackson Miller Corrupt
By RHarrison | 15 September 2007 | Jeanette Rishell, 50th HOD District | 21 Comments
Jeanette Rishell, candidate for the 50th House District, mailed out a whopper of a mail piece this week. It has been a while since I’ve seen anything quite this negative, yet completely devoid of substance.
It starts out with this statement:
“Miller has promised to fix the problem of illegal immigration, but he seems to be more interested in filling his own pockets.”
Wow. I know people who disagree with Miller’s positions, but I have never heard anyone say he was dishonest. The piece goes on:
“It’s sad but true. Delegate Jackson Miller is better at serving himself than serving his district. When he’s down in Richmond, he votes to line his own pockets with pay raises but does nothing to help his constituents get ahead.”
Jeanette Rishell “cites” three things that Miller has done to warrant this attack.
- He voted to increase his own pay.
- Voted for development projects to benefit himself.
- Skipped or was late for 25% of all Manassas Council meetings in 2006.
I’m putting “cites” in quotes here because there are no actual citations in the piece, so I can’t tell what Ms. Rishell is talking about. Jeanette Rishell is making some serious accusations against a respected member of our community - without offering one ounce of proof to back up her wild claims. Wow.
(Jackson Miller, in contrast, has bent over backwards to justify every criticism he has made against Jeanette Rishell’s record. Every single mailing and flier he has produced that mentions Ms. Rishell’s record contains complete references backing up Miller’s claims.)
Back to Jeanette Rishell’s mailing.
“He voted to increase his own pay.” When? Not this year in Richmond. No bill was passed, voted on or even introduced in the General Assembly this year that would have raised legislators’ pay, as far as I can tell. Without a reference I can’t be certain, but this looks like a out-right lie.
“Voted for development projects to benefit himself.” Ms. Rishell suggests that this is a serious accusation, but it isn’t. Voting to approve a project that conflicts with the public interest is bad, but voting for a project that helps both the public and the legislator is fine. The transportation bill will help Miller and his family. Does that mean he should have opposed it? Keep in mind that Miller is a real estate agent, so any bill that helps homeowners could, plausibly, be said to “line his own pockets.” Without a reference, we have no idea what Rishell is talking about, nor any way to evaluate the claim.
Moreover, when did Miller vote to approve a development project? The state legislature doesn’t usually deal with development issues and he isn’t on any committee that would have. I think Rishell is referring to something Miller did while he was on the Manassas City Council. This is a bit odd, since the mailer specifically says Miller did these things “down in Richmond.” Such a slight-of-hand is dishonest, but it is the most generous explanation I can think of.
“Skipped or was late for 25% of all Manassas Council meetings in 2006.” How pathetic. This claim, again, doesn’t refer to something “down in Richmond.” Moreover, being late for only 25% of the Council meetings while running for another office, earning a living and caring for a young family is, in my view, remarkable. Without a reference we have no way of knowing how many of these meetings Miller missed, rather than simply arriving 5 minutes late, but I suspect if there were many, Ms. Rishell would have used that number instead.
Finally, Jeanette Rishell makes the following statement three times on the mailing:
“Pretend to care about illegal immigration.”
One last time - wow. Jackson Miller was one of the first politicians in Virginia to recognize the problems associated with illegal immigration. He single-handedly forced the Manassas City Council to confront the problem. He based both of his political campaigns on it. Then he went to Richmond, introduced and passed several major anti-illegal alien bills in the House, becoming one of the leading spokesmen in the state on the issue in the process. In short, Jackson Miller has done more to combat illegal immigration in Virginia than perhaps any other politician in the state.
And Rishell says this was all “pretend.”
Let’s not forget that Jeanette Rishell ferociously opposed Delegate Miller’s efforts on illegal immigration – until she lost the last election. Ms. Rishell found this issue late, after a lifetime of fighting on behalf of illegal aliens. She has done nothing to combat the problem, offers no solutions, yet bashes the one man who had the courage to force the local political establishment to confront the issue.
How badly does Ms. Rishell want to get to Richmond? Badly enough that she is willing to abandon all her beliefs, turn on her friends and trash the reputation of honorable people. I’ve met Jeanette Rishell many times and have always believed her to be pleasant and decent. I guess I was wrong.
The opinions expressed here are solely the views of the author, and not representative of the position of any organization, political party, doughnut shop, knitting guild, or waste recycling facility, but may be correctly attributed to the Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy. If anything in the above article has offended you, please click here to receive an immediate apology.
You can follow the discussion through the Comments feed.
21 Comments
Views: 1290
Loading ...
From what I understand, VA state legislators haven’t voted to raise their salaries in 15+ years since the early 1990s, and the subject is a political taboo in this state, since it is a part-time legislature. I don’t know what she is basing that on.
As I said earlier today when I posted after I received the mailer, it really is sad if this is all she can use to attack Jackson about. Though I suppose she is hoping folks will not do any sort of verification or research to see exactly what Jackson has done. And, what does that say about her, that she has that opinion of voters?
I think it’s hilarious that I received the mailer from Rishell.
We need and deserve Jackson Miller
http://www.miller4delegate.com/home/?
Jackson,
You’ve got our support in PWC, and I’ve talked quite of few folks in the two cities you have their support as well.
First, let me put in my disclaimer ; I voted for Jackson Miller last year and intend to vote for him again this year.
As I have said before, I disagree with Jackson quite often but have found him to be very honest and forthcoming. When Jackson sent out hard hitting mail last year against Rishell it was issue oriented and as Mr. Harrison pointed out in this post, he always referenced where he got the quote or information. This piece references nothing. I thought some of it was slightly negative but it was never over the top.
Rishells piece today is hardly issue oriented. In fact this piece basically attacks Miller the person. Not Miller the politician. It calls him greedy, corrupt, and lazy. It says nothing about the issues or where he stands on the issues.
1. GREEDY - votes for a self pay raise.
2. CORRUPT - makes votes to line his own pockets.
3. LAZY - misses or is late for 25% of his council meetings in 2006.
Jeanette, this is as nasty a piece as I have seen in Manassas politics. This makes the Chapman/Parrish primary (which was the most negative race I had ever seen in Manassas) look like vanilla pudding.
I did some fact checking on the City of Manassas web page and found that Rishell gave Miller a break in saying that he was late or absent for 25% of his meetings.
In fact, out of the 57 meetings (the amount of meetings in 2006 held before Miller was sworn in as delegate.) Miller was late or absent 28% of the time.
Late - 9 times
Absent - 7 times
The real story is in what he actually missed.
2-6-06 - 11 min. late
2-13-06 - 2 min. late
3-15-06 - 7 min. late
3-22-06 - 12 min. late
6-5-06 - absent - informational meeting only. no missed city votes.
6-7-06 - absent ” ”
6-21-06 - absent ” ”
7-19-06 - 15 min. late
7-24-06 - 8 min. late
9-13-06 - absent - missed consent agenda vote only. nothing serious.
10-4-06 - absent - ” ”
10-18-06 - absent - informational meeting only. no missed city votes.
10-30-06 - 5 min. late
11-13-06 - 37min. late
41 other meetings he was on time and present. Dosn’t seem like such a big deal really. When you look at the minutes, Miller didnt miss much more than the rest of the city council.
oops. some analyst I am.
correction;
3-22-06 was 2 min. late not 12
4-5-06 - 12 min. late
7-5-06 - absent - organizational meeting only (swearing in of new council members)
Let’ s see — negative, yet devoid of substance. Sounds like bvbl and the merryband of crackpots that post here all the time.
“Ms. Rishell found this issue late, after a lifetime of fighting on behalf of illegal aliens.”
Prove it.
Anonymous..if you think bvbl and HSM is a bunch of crackpots why do you bother to post constantly. Perhaps a more constructive hobby is in order.
ogoon,
Well said, and thank you!
anon,
Looks like YOU are the crackpot!
That was me no “r” on the end. sorry
12:47 - knock it off… you are giving all of us anonymous posters a bad name.
anon @ 6:58pm,
I think the guilty parties know who they are!!
Agreed not all anon’s fall into the crackpot category.
RHarrison:
Do you happen to have an image of this piece? I would really like to see the whole thing.
I am shocked that Jeanette would be out something this negative (in addition to the “Bad Hand” piece discussed earlier).
Matt,
See the post before this. Greg got a picture up before I could finish my post.
Frankly, I was shocked too. I would have put money on this kind of attack being beneath Rishell, whom I have always thought of as being very nice. I assumed that someone from her campaign would have posted by now telling us when Miller voted to raise his own salary. That is such a clear statement of fact that I assumed they would have some evidence to back it up. But two days after the mailer went out, nobody has been able to find any vote, in Richmond or on the Manassas City Council, that would have raised his salary. You just don’t see blatant lies like that very often. That is, lies referring to a specific, definable event that not only didn’t happen, but which is easy to prove did not happen.
The thought of political power affects some people badly, I guess.
Thanks; I thought there were two mailings discussing these items. I’ll do some digging to see who is doing her mail consulting. Do you know what the Paid for and Authorized By line said?
I’m very disappointed; I have no problem going negative on someone as long as there is factual evidence to back it up. This seems to be a big stretch at best.
Matt,
The paid for line is “Paid for and Authorized by Friends of Jeanette Rishell”. This isn’t an independent expenditure. I believe that there will be a tremendous backlash against this piece. Rishell will be asked to back up these attacks with fact, and will either be proven to be a liar, or is stretching the truth so far that she cannot make her case. Whichever, this was a big, big mistake.
As you pointed out, a campaign can work “negative” and be effective, as long a reasonable person can make the connection, when presented with supporting facts. However, if the supporting facts are weak, then the campaign looks foolish. If their is no supporting fact, and the campaign proven to be making false accusations, then they look desperate.
I would guess that Rishell has been getting an earful when she goes door to door, and her poll-numbers aren’t moving in a positive direction, so they decided to do a hit-piece. Problem is, all it will end up doing is pissing people off at her, and will end up losing ground as a result. Also, she fired the first shot in this cycle. Look for the Miller campaign to hit back…hard. I believe an immigration piece would do the trick, as Rishell has plenty to cite showing she’s not only weak on immigration, but actually “pro-illegal”.
I did a little research and you are wrong in calling Rishell a lier. On April 24, 2006 Jackson Miller voted for a Fiscal Year 2007 Operating Budget (Ordinance #O-2006-26). The budget included a pay raise of $3,300 for City Council members. If thats not voting for a pay raise then I don’t know what is. So I would hope you get your facts straight next time before you start calling someone a lier.
Anonymous, your contention has been well refuted by both my daughter (who is actually capable of doing research) and Steve Randolph (Councilman) in the thread “Rishell’s Campaign Lies Again,” where you posted your nonsensical comment in its entirety immediately before posting it here. I don’t necessarily believe that you’re a liar (”lier”) Anonymous…I just believe that you have the same research capabilities as whoever put that trash piece together for Rishell. I DO, however, consider Rishell and her campaign people to be liars. Of course, if the shoe fits……
Don’t worry…I’ll be sure to follow you around and refute this wherever you may decide to post the same nonsense.
Lier Lier pants on fier!!!