Civic DutyElectionGovernmentLiberal FailuresPolitically Unethical

Fayetteville Mayoral Candidate Mitch Colvin Slings Mud After Swearing Not To!

Fayetteville, N.C. – In less than 24 hours after saying that he wouldn’t sling mud in Fayetteville’s mayoral race candidate Mitch Colvin, the owner of Colvin Funeral Home and Crematorium which is under probation by the State of North Carolina for unethical business practices, slings ‘mud’ at candidate the Honorable Mayor Nat Robertson.

I suppose it was just too much to hope for, to expect a convicted criminal like Mitch Colvin to keep his word.

Fayetteville Observer’s Tim White’s quite obvious collusion with Mitch Colvin to manipulate the voters and attempting to control the flow of information by trying to establish themselves as the arbitrators of what, or what is not, a legitimate issue of discussion has blown up in their faces.

Apparently Mitch Colvin and Tim White don’t even know the definition of ‘mud slinging’.

Mud·Sling·ing; ˈmədˌsliNGiNG/ – noun – informal – noun: mud-slinging
1. the use of insults and false accusations with the aim of damaging the reputation of an opponent.

Serving the greater good by exposing the legitimate provable documented weaknesses of the other candidate is not considered to be mud slinging but rather a moral dimension of an opponent’s duty to the community.

Reminding voters of an opponent’s criminal record is not mud slinging. Reminding voters of an opponent’s losses in civil litigation that exposes an opponent’s unethical business practices is not mud slinging either. In either case it is the actions of the opponent themself that damaged his or her credibility and it is perfectly legitimate to remind voters of those character flaws and weaknesses.

Accusing Nat Robertson of mud slinging when there is absolutely no demonstrable cause for doing so is mud slinging. Mitch Colvin’s Facebook comment that “Nat has refused to play nice in this race…we will not be moved by bully style politics” is mud slinging.

The only candidate mud slinging in this mayoral race is Mitch Colvin!

And the voters will not be moved by Mitch Colvin’s whines to ignore his bully style criminal record of thievery, gun crimes, dope possession and customer abusing business practices.

Mitch Colvin Making His Fair Play Pledge he Broke Mere Hours Later

Let’s break down Tim White’s question and Mitch Colvin’s response.

Tim White: You could ask the candidates tonight if they would pledge for their campaigns and their surrogates to only focus on issues and not personal mud slinging. What do you say about that Mr. Colvin?

The question insinuates that mud slinging has occurred while not stating specifically just what comprised the allegation of mud slinging. Just who determined that there has been any mud slinging? Isn’t that a question more properly answered by the voters rather than a glorified newspaper delivery boy?

Mitch Colvin: It’s too late. It’s already started. [Laughs]

What’s so funny? Mitch Colvin’s criminal record and unethical business dealings certainly aren’t a laughing matter.

Uhhh…you know listen uhhh…if you got something to say, something to talk about either a vision or a plan, you don’t need to talk about that other stuff.

Just who put mayoral candidate Mitch Colvin in charge of deciding what the voters choose to talk about? That’s a pretty arrogant and off putting stance by a mayoral candidate. Other stuff? Why don’t you just say what it is? Your criminal record and unethical business practices.

Uhhh…and…that’s what discourages good people from participating in public service.

A “good person” doesn’t have a criminal record and several N.C. State issued fines for illegal business practices.

And…you know as in many of you know…uhh…and so…I think that I’m gonna pledge today and I… uh invite… uh my opponent ‘da Mayor to do the same, that I would focus on the issues and trying to attack his him or family or anything like that and uhh and keep this a keyed up, a clean campaign because that turns people off quite frankly.

We would like mayoral Mitch Colvin to provide us evidence of Nat Robertson having engaged in mud slinging of any kind. What really turns people off is criminals and unethical businessmen having the audacity to run for a government office and expecting “We the People” to find that acceptable in any manner.

And I think that as we want to get more engagement, more participation, and more engagement in [Cough] /local [Cough] politics you can’t do things that make them want to turn it off. We see enough of that nationally and statewide.

Society certainly does want to turn off any desires by those with unethical and criminal inclinations to run for government office. It’s part of our nation’s current “Drain the Swamp” initiative. Get used to it because I suspect that you will be seeing quite a lot more of it in future elections.

So…uhhh…I wanna make that pledge today to him to keep it clean. I said last night I like him personally and this isn’t it, nothing about running against him.

Well, as we can see, that didn’t last long. Not even a full day.

This is for, we’re applying for a job. And uhh wanna make the best case that I’m the man for the job.

No. No you’re not. In fact, in view of your record you’re the worst man for the job. Facts are facts.

All too often cries of mud slinging are an attempt to extort sympathy from the voters where none is warranted or deserved.

Equally all too often demands for pledges of ‘fair play’ found on the heels of accusations of mud slinging are nothing more than liberal Democrat attempts to muzzle opponents to keep them from reminding the voters of legitimate information they should have before they make such important voting decisions. And isn’t it strange how it is nearly always the Democrats that are the ones with the corrupt reputations?

It is vitally important to know of a candidate’s criminal history because it gives us as voters the opportunity to ward off potential governmental corruption. Just as knowledge of a candidate’s unethical malfeasance in their business dealings enables voters to weed out those who have demonstrated that they unskilled with no business sense. A candidate who can’t run their own business correctly certainly shouldn’t be ‘hired’ by the voters to run the people’s governmental business.

Whether mayoral candidate Mitch Colvin likes it or not, his character and his inability to run a clean business is an issue in the mayoral race.

Mitch Colvin’s problem is that he’s destroyed his own character by his own criminal and despicable business actions and now he seeks to hide his criminal unethical character from you.

For some strange reason neither Mitch Colvin nor the Fayetteville Observer seem to think that you should make Mitch Colvin’s criminal history and his numerous business state law violations and subsequent fines a part of your voter decision making process.

You only get to make one vote. And you have the right to all the information possible so you can make it a good one.




Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *