THE DAVIS FAMILY IS SICK- UPDATE
UPDATE #2- I'm working on trying to turn this PDF file into something where I can cross out Chap's personal information- will post as soon as I can.
I just saw a mailing sent out by Jeannemarie Devolites Davis where she puts in a large image a disclosure form that has CHAP'S WIFE AND KIDS NAME ON IT WITH THEIR HOME ADDRESS AND TELEPHONE NUMBER AND FAILS TO BLACK OUT ANY OF THE INFORMATION. Sources tell me that Sharon Petersen has been overwhelmed with hate filled phone calls from this mailing. IS THERE NO DEPTH TO WHICH JEANNEMARIE WON'T SINK?
If the Davis's want to play this game, fine. Their home telephone number is 703-938-X5XX. Jeannemarie's cell is 703-582-XXX7. UPDATE YES IS WINNING SO I ADDED A DIGIT. KEEP VOTING, I WANT A MANDATE BEFORE WE POST THE WHOLE NUMBER.
Do you think I should publish the rest of it, the same way they just did with Chap's home number (and address, and names of his kids!!)???
Voting is open until noon on this issue.
Well that's extremely disgusting. But, no, you should not do that. Let that be the realm only of Malkin like blogs. Be more honorable.
Posted by: Doug | October 25, 2007 at 09:29 AM
I'm a Repub but I've had it with Jeanne's tactics this year. Her obsession with attacking Chap personally has gone too far.
Posted by: | October 25, 2007 at 09:32 AM
In fact, there should absolutely without a doubt be a LAW against any candidate publishing or including ANY personally identifiable information (PII), based on the federal privacy act, about their opponent in ANY campaign literature, advertisements, or message of any kind.
That is despicable, and had I known that when I ran for office I may have thought twice about it.
Posted by: Doug in Mount Vernon | October 25, 2007 at 09:33 AM
That said, I agree with Doug.
Don't publish that and stoop to her disgusting level.
Posted by: Doug in Mount Vernon | October 25, 2007 at 09:34 AM
Are you serious---the KIDS names were on it!!!!?????
Heinous.
Posted by: Doug in Mount Vernon | October 25, 2007 at 09:36 AM
The kids names and home address with their phone number where a predator could see if their parents were home.
Heinous is too weak of a word.
Posted by: Not Larry Sabato | October 25, 2007 at 09:38 AM
Absolutely, do NOT publish those numbers. Let Chap use this against her.
Posted by: TC | October 25, 2007 at 09:42 AM
NLS, don't bother. I hear her number is in a bunch of bathrooms. While it doesn't actually have her name, it's the one you guys see that says, for a good time, call..." (I'm so mean, but, really, I couldn't resist.)
Posted by: | October 25, 2007 at 09:43 AM
I hear Janet's campaign manager likes publishing Hooters waitress's phone numbers.... OH no wait he just uses voter vault to find them...
Posted by: Alex P. Keaton | October 25, 2007 at 09:45 AM
I hear all the guys in the General Assembly have Jeannemarie's number. "For a good time, call..." Hey, it worked for Tom!
Posted by: | October 25, 2007 at 09:45 AM
I guess JMDD would not be for a Colorado or South Carolina like child protection act that outlaws something like this in general?
Posted by: Doug | October 25, 2007 at 09:47 AM
You are every bit as bad as those you call "sick." You really think that two wrongs make a right?
Posted by: Common Sense | October 25, 2007 at 09:47 AM
For those of you who are disturbed that the name of the wife and kids is public maybe you should check out Chap’s website. They are all listed there, along with much other personal information. However I agree that any private phone numbers and such that are not part of a candidate’s own website should not be made public by his/her competitor.
I’ll be glad when Nov 7th gets here.
Posted by: George | October 25, 2007 at 09:52 AM
Just because Chap's wife and kids' names are on his website doesn't mean that JMDD shouldn't black them out in a mailer. It clearly isn't as bad as publishing the phone number/address, but at the same time, it is giving people information--people who probably wouldn't have bothered to look it up on Chap's site in the first place.
Posted by: Aimee | October 25, 2007 at 09:57 AM
Chap's website doesn't have his home address for people to come harass his children.
HAMMER THE BITCH ON THIS.
Posted by: | October 25, 2007 at 10:00 AM
Ben,
Fortunately, you knew the answer before you even posted the thread: No. Let her dwell under that rock on her own.
Posted by: Pete in Williamsburg | October 25, 2007 at 10:01 AM
Does anyone have an image/link to this mailer?
Posted by: Kate | October 25, 2007 at 10:06 AM
George, what the hell are you talking about? Chap's personal phone number and address are nowhere to be found on his website! If you happen to have found them, please tell me, because all I see on the contact page are Campaign Office details.
Get over yourself, dude. This is scum, and Jeannemarie, or whoever is responsible for the ad, should be prosecuted in someway. I'm not sure how, I'm not a lawyer. But this cannot go unpunished.
Posted by: Dan Geroe | October 25, 2007 at 10:18 AM
While I agree the JMDD should not have sent that out I would like to point out that it was a discloser form so any person who wanted to could get a copy of that form.
Posted by: shaking my head | October 25, 2007 at 10:21 AM
Dan, George meant the info about the kids was on the website not the address and phone number.
Posted by: shaking my head | October 25, 2007 at 10:22 AM
Dan,
I would suggest that you read my post... I did not say that the phone numbers were there.. in fact I specifically said that
"any private phone numbers and such that are not part of a candidate’s own website should not be made public by his/her competitor."
You really should get your facts correct before you start to berate someone. Take a deep breath and count to ten or something.
Posted by: George | October 25, 2007 at 10:22 AM
Ben- can you give a little more context to the mailer? Or maybe you could scan and post it with the info blacked out?
I don't get why they would do this at all, so I'm at a loss. And there is only a picture of Chap and his family on his web site, not his phone number and no other personal information.
Posted by: Doug | October 25, 2007 at 10:25 AM
Having the information on a disclosure form, and having the information mailed out to 30,000 addresses isn't really the same ball park. It's not even the same zip code.
Posted by: TC | October 25, 2007 at 10:26 AM
Wait - is this an image of a form that is already available to the public? Legally required to be disclosed? By law?
I can understand that it might be wrong to put something that is public more into the public - but anyone who would abuse this info already had access to it.
Just doesn't seem that big a deal.
Posted by: Bruce | October 25, 2007 at 10:27 AM
God, that's despicable. Release her information, stat.
Posted by: Luna | October 25, 2007 at 10:35 AM