There is, however, a section of interest under John Curtis' section in the Daily Herald article (The Campaign) that has tied into a number of posts on this blog and the newly published website, www.followthemoneyprovo.com. Mr. Curtis is expressing his dissatisfaction that there is so much "negativity" in the current campaign for Mayor, and I believe his definition of negativity is entertaining. He states the following:
"Curtis is willing to accept potshots because they're part of politics, he said. One of the potshots -- that he was a Democrat for awhile -- is silly because it's not hurting him. 'Other than those detractors, nobody cares,' he said. He's also being held to a different standard, he said. His camp is blamed for all the negative information that comes out about his opponent and the political action committee attacking Councilwoman Cindy Richards. People opposed to his candidacy continue to send negative e-mails about him, he said, including one circulating a photo from his primary election night party at Brick Oven pizza restaurant that featured some of the people behind the anti-Richards PAC, stopcindy.com. 'It's all ridiculous, Curtis said. 'Other than a Web site that says stop John, there's as much negativity going on about my campaign as any other campaign in the city,' he said."
Firstly, I want to focus on this picture Mr. Curtis is talking about, and I have provided a modified copy of this picture below:
This picture is finding its way around the Internet with considerable speed, but just because Mr. Curtis wants to shoo it away as an item of no consequence should raise red flags in the mind of any person who knows anything about politics. When a politician attempts to directly confront an issue, which supposedly has neither weight nor bearing on their campaign, and dismiss it entirely as "smear", why would you use energy to even talk about the issue? The simple answer is that this picture is more than what Curtis would like to call a smear campaign, but is a font-seat into his closest support network.
In the purple box we have the candidate himself, Mr. John Curtis. Enough said.
In the red box we can see Mr. Steve Turley, City Wide District II. Whether you love or hate Steve Turley is really not a concern of mine, but I find his presence at this meeting more than a coincidence. Mr. Curtis, in the Daily Herald campaign article, tried to lessen the ties between his campaign and Mr. Turley by saying the following: [1]
"Curtis also said he has met individually with all the members of the Provo Municipal Council, including Cindy Clark, Steve Clark's wife, and Steve Turley, with whom he is frequently associated. 'Cindy Clark has been a bigger part of shaping his campaign than Turley,' he said."
Now Mr. Curtis might consider this to be 'negativity,' but I like to call it asking the hard questions. If Cindy Clark is, indeed, "a bigger part of shaping" of your campaign than Steve Turley is, then why isn't she in this photo or any photo at one of your campaign events? Despite the fact that she is the wife of your opponent, how can you say Cindy Clark is helping to shape your campaign? What evidence are you placing in the public forum to show that Mrs. Clark is an inspiration to your campaign? The answer: nothing. This was not even a good attempt to cover up the fact that this picture (which you may consider negative, but others consider evidence) you have surrounded yourself by your closest supporters.
In the green box is Mr. Taylor Oldroyd, an individual I have talked about on this blog previously. [2] Mr. Oldroyd is a master of political games, including the stopcindy.com website, while Mr. Curtis upholds a righteous standard that he does not believe in playing political games, but wants to focus on the issues. Once again, this is a most interesting connection within the Curtis campaign. I am reminded of a song which sums up this relationship very well, and strangely enough it comes from the group Metallica, Sad but True:
You, You’re my mask
You’re my cover, my shelter
You, You’re my mask
You’re the one who’s blamed
Do, Do my work
Do my dirty work, scapegoat
Do, Do my deeds
For you’re the one who’s shamed
Mr. Curtis may not be the one who is orchestrating negative campaigning, but those who support him do so unabashedly in the public forum. As a result, Mr. Curtis is acting as a very elaborate puppet master, trying to distance himself from a campaign of negativity not seen in this City for many years while he is holding the strings to the major players. Don't worry, Mr. Curtis, Mr. Oldroyd is shaming his professionalism and dirtying his hands in a drastic attempt to get you into office as Mayor.
And finally, in the blue box we have Sterling Beck, candidate for City Council District 5 and directly supported by the Utah County Association of Realtors and the stopcindy.com campaign. In other words, one of Beck's largest supporters is Mr. Taylor Oldroyd. I really don't know what is more convenient, that a picture was taken with all of these players in the same room for the same event, or that Mr. Beck is conveniently situated in the shadow of his biggest supporter and PAC? This is not negativity, Mr. Curtis, this is the plain truth. What I have failed to hear from you are reasons, despite your attempts to shoo this picture away as a product of smear campaigning. Pictures tell a thousand words, and this picture is definitely talking.
From Mr. Curtis' earlier comments at the beginning of this blog, I also find another quote to be quite interesting. Mr. Curtis believes that he is being held to "a different standard" when compared to his opponent, Steve Clark. If I may, let me tell you a reason why people are looking towards your camp once negative information surfaces about your opponent. The main reason is found at your right hand, and that is Brian Chapman, your campaign manager. Anyone who knows anything about BCR Political, with whom Mr. Chapman is associated with, knows that dirty politics follow close behind. Also, maybe you have forgotten that this is a political race, and that once negative comments surface the first person to be blamed is the opposite camp. This is what most people would deem common sense, but in your book it is obviously an elaborate political conspiracy against your 'change' for Provo.
Lastly, I thoroughly enjoy the attempts of Mr. Curtis to shoo away his political past. First he attempts to embrace the fact that he ran as a Democrat in Utah, then at other times he tries to nullify the issue as negativity. Previously in this blog, I have written about why Mr. Curtis is concerned about this issue, and how he is not giving all the facts behind his decision to run as a Democrat then a Republican in the State of Utah. [3] Mr. Curtis believes the issue of him being a Democrat is "not hurting him," and that those who have listened to his political past are nothing but "detractors." (in other words, Mr. Curtis believes those people never added any value to his campaign to begin with). Yet there is more behind this story than what Mr. Curtis is telling the public, and he is openly lying to the people about the reasons behind why he ran as a Democrat. He focuses upon his "core values" never changing from a Republican platform, but his old campaign website as a Democrat says differently. [4]
Mr. Curtis, this is not "negative campaigning" or "smearing," this is what we like to call the hard facts. These are the issues you want to go away, but they will not. It is time to start telling the whole truth, rather than your interpretation of the truth.
[1] http://www.heraldextra.com/article_f9b9d59d-e19b-59e9-bca9-8efabfe09f60.html
[2] http://whoisjohncurtis.blogspot.com/2009/10/guilty-by-association.html
[3] http://whoisjohncurtis.blogspot.com/2009/09/tale-of-two-curtises.html
