Joe Miklosi's campaign manager, Joe Hamill, recently tweeted out an article about former political staffers seeking pay for their work and added a comment about the detrimental effects that would have on their careers. This revelation comes a day after The Colorado Observer reported there is an ongoing pay dispute between Joe Miklosi's Congressional campaign and a former political staffer.
Does Joe Miklosi share Joe Hamill's view about staffers seeking pay? Does he think it's appropriate for a campaign manager working for a campaign embroiled in a labor dispute to be publicly trashing workers seeking back pay?
On April 6, Joe Hamill tweeted this:
With a formal back pay complaint filed against the Miklosi campaign for stiffing the former campaign finance director Kirsten Boyd, it's probably not a legally nor politically smart decision to weigh in publicly on the subject of compensation owed to former employees.
Since Hamill is the campaign manager, isn't it safe to assume he speaks for the campaign? As The Observer article could easily be named "How Joe Miklosi's campaign gets away with not paying its finance director" it seems fair to say Hamill doesn't think Boyd's back pay complaint is a very smart course of action.
Joe Miklosi has yet to weigh in on the scandal roiling his campaign, but with his campaign manager dipping his toe into the issue, he might have to clarify his position.
You haven’t told me what you think about Miklosi not paying his staff. Don’t you think that’s wrong? Does it call Miklosi’s character into question?
about Obama eating dog, as was customary where he visited as a child? Peak and all the other hit sites have been pretty silent about that. It couldn’t be that it’s a complete non-issue, unlike Romney and HIS treatment of his family pet, is it?
I am ignoring it because I don’t care. I’m not interested in Miklosi’s campaign. I’m interested in what Peak’s sudden
coverageslamming someone they were so dismissive of says about Peak.Seems more like a sign of how bad a candidate Miklosi is. Are you saying every time Colorado Pols writes a hit diary on a Republican it’s a sign they are a threat to a Democrat? So Kevin Lundberg is a threat to Jared Polis then?
Do you really want to stand by that flawed logic? It’ll come back to bite you.
Pols is liberal but independent of the Democratic party. Peak is a GOP mouthpiece.
See the difference?
Please tell me you don’t believe that. You sound like a fool even saying it.
They’ve ignored, downplayed, and bloviated about it, but no one has said that it means something other than what I allege. It’s not so much what I “believe,” it’s what I conclude based on the available evidence, and will change my view as new evidence comes to light. If you have any, share it. Otherwise, don’t be too sure about which one of us looks foolish here.
You make an allegation with no proof. I could just as easily point out the multitude of daily back to back to back attacks on SOS Gessler as proof of collaboration between Colorado Pols and the states Democratic Party. It sure seems that Pols is really invested laying the groundwork for disputing any results announced by Gessler’s office in November.
I’ll admit my evidence is all circumstantial, but you know the saying about fire being where there’s smoke. And, as I’ve pointed out, no one has a good, plausible explanation to explain Peak’s actions and inactions when covering Colorado political stories.
As stated, I will certainly change my tune if evidence contrary to my conclusion comes to light.
The difference between what Peak and Pols do is that a) the authors at Pols generally have very good evidence supporting their allegations, and b) they will criticize Democrats and Democratic blunders when they occur. Peak does neither.
If that simply isn’t true, then do what I do. Make a case. Point out what they say, and come up with plausible explanation. That, or point out why my conclusion can’t possibly be true.
Until then, my friend…
April 24, 2012, PEAK:
My response:
Two Miklosi hit-piece diaries in 24 hours is a pretty good measure of how much of a problem he is for Rethugs in this state.