It's quite obvious that Mr. Williams doesn't respect the law or the judge's orders. Front page of the CA features a picture taken yesterday of these signs outside the Election Commission! Glad to see the Judge make the right decision to put a legal boot in Latroy's chest, but clearly he needs some further "motivation."
Whose request are you asking about exactly? Who is so full of what? What truth is being slanted in this article? This is about as basic and factual as articles get.
Tjsm, I'm genuinely concerned about your ability to communicate with words. This is a clear indication that we aren't doing enough in our schools.
Look at JustRight trying to discredit the writer. It's not "slant" when the facts being reported make Wilkins look like an unethical (shocking, right?) snake. The writer calls out the Wilkins camp for what appears to be a string of election violations, and the response from Wilkins supporters is all name-calling and defamation (even more shocking, right?)
Given that M. "Latrine" Williams has a history of unethical, if not illegal, behavior, he should be in jail for his actions. You don't accidentally make signs and commercials that falsely depict a number of things (including a Presidential endorsement apparently) by accident. This guy knows exactly what he's doing, and snakes like "Rickey" (lol) align themselves with people like this. Latroy, Wilkins, Herenton, Sidney ... they're all the same person.
Since I've started seeing Wilkins supporters say things like "Even if Cohen wins ..." I'm fairly sure they already see the writing on the wall which, by the way, says that Wilkins is looking about as strong as the Drunk Joe Brown. If you vote for Wilkins, you are either being paid to do so or you are just blissfully ignorant.
Bueno couldn't have corrected ICarewhatever any better! Clearly ICare is one of these Wilkins/Herenton goons that are either completely ignorant to the facts or knowingly choose to spew misinformation all over local and social media. It's no secret that Wilkins has taken more money from impoverished Memphians than he has brought or given (if any at all) to Memphians. In fact, much of his ill-gotten gains are a matter of public record.
You say Wilkins is better and will do things differently, yet he hasn't raised a single issue where Cohen has mishandled anything ... Oh wait, I forgot about the police/fire benefit debacle caused by the Mayor and City Council. Let's not gloss over or forget where this massive shortcoming in city budget comes from: the good ole' glory days of Herenton who, by the way, is arguably one of Wilkins' biggest endorsements. This decline we've experienced in Memphis is largely due in part to people like Wilkins and Herenton making terrible (and many times greedy) decisions.
It's funny that "we" need to take care of veterans. I wonder what YOU have done to take care of veterans? Are you a veteran? On what basis do you make the claim that Steven Cohen hasn't done anything for vets? Cohen's office has personally helped me and other servicemen and women that I know immensely on VA and other veteran issues. As a partially disabled veteran who has lived in the 9th most of my life, I can say with certainty that Steven Cohen is the ONLY person in Memphis, other than my family, who has offered any help to me with veterans' issues. But sure, continue to spout your keywords and talking points.
By all means, ICare and friends, climb up on the Titanic. Keep playing the world's saddest song on your fiddle as you go down with the ship. I'm certain the constituency will choose the right person. Send us a postcard from the bottom on Aug. 7th.
Hahacoughcough ... that's me choking on laughter. I did read the followup and I commented there as well. Apparently facts are something we don't care too much about.
"Mr. Wilkins apparently DID have an endorsement ..." Wrong. Wilkins DID NOT and (as of writing this) DOES NOT have their endorsement. President Chalmers has made it clear that she wants to endorse Wilkins, however, according to her own statement she cannot and has not endorsed Wilkins.
"Mr. Cohen relied on the fact that two people showed up at a press conference as "proof" of his endorsement." Wrong. Cohen states that his campaign made contact and received the support of the union via telephone. Cohen has also received maximum contributions from AFSCME when Wilkins has received none. The union also sent to reps to Cohen's endorsement press conference. These are all fairly clear indicators that someone has someone's support and endorsement.
Thanks but no thanks. I'll pass on his ability to serve. We see how he likes to line his pockets with money of Memphians. Troll somewhere else.
Not only did AFSCME make max contributions to Steve Cohen, they had two representatives (not random members as one commenter mentioned) appear behind Cohen WITH THE REST OF THE ENDORSERS' REPRESENTATIVES AT HIS ENDORSEMENT ANNOUNCEMENT PRESS CONFERENCE. No, I'm not yelling. I'm just using caps for emphasis.
There is clearly some butt-covering going on in the form of questioning Cohen's endorsements. The truth is, other than a sworn statement, it looks like Cohen's team had every reason to believe they formally had the endorsement. Wilkins, on the other hand, was left all alone on the sidewalk with no contributions and not so much as a single "random member" from their alleged endorser.
Ms. Chalmers admits to making what could quite literally be seen as a stereotypical back-room deal without the knowledge of even her own vice president. Looks like the real culprit here is a monumental breakdown in communication amongst the leadership of 1733. How does the president of 1733 not know what she is and is not allowed to do? How does the president of 1733 not know that her union has made maximum contributions and sent members to Cohen's endorsement press conference (not as members of the crowd but standing alongside the endorsers' reps)? Moreover, do these things alone not make it fairly evident that not only does Ms. Chalmers seem to have no idea how to run a union ... with accountability - she is willing to throw her union onto the [expletive] Titanic.
Ricky hasn't gone negative because there is nothing to go negative with on Cohen. Check his record; I did. If you like back-room deals, unethical behavior in both the private and public sector, being left all alone on the sidewalk by alleged super-supporters and getting beat really bad at just about everything, then you are going to LOVE Ricky.
If by "running a good campaign" you actually meant "getting beat at every turn," then yes you must be correct.
All this talk about Cohen being a bully is nothing but empty name calling. Here's a newsflash for ICareblahblah and JustRight: Effective representation in D.C. requires the ability to get things done. Sometimes that representation requires fighting tooth and nail on behalf of the district. Not only does Wilkins seem to grasp things quite slowly, he has clearly shown that his efforts to get things done are easily trumped by the more experienced Congressman. Why would you vote someone so weak and unethical as Wilkins into office? Also, should Cohen just simply not try to win (lol)?
Cohen's opponent called him a "political bully" for pressuring 1733 to back out of their so-called "endorsement." Meanwhile, he's saying this WHILE STANDING ON THE SIDEWALK IN FRONT OF THE UNION HALL (which, by the way, refused to allow them into the building) DURING A FAILED ATTEMPT TO USURP THE ENDORSEMENT FROM COHEN. Typical pot-calling-the-kettle-black by Wilkins. Of course, what else should we expect from a man with such ethical and awesome supporters like Herenton, Chism, et al!? (/sarcasm)
I shudder at the thought of someone like Ricky "The Snake" Wilkins representing us. Steve Cohen isn't running scared; he's running strong.
By Flyer Staff
download this issue
click here to see more »