To the editor:
I found it just downright wrong the comments Mike Anthony made in his editorial about Democratic candidate for the CountyiCouncil Julie Leicht.
One would like to think that Mr. Anthony, of all people, would listen to the advice he wrote about in his editorial on April 22.
“Given thatiit’s our intent to report to our readers on the progress elected officials are making on the pledges they made toivoters, particularly those who attained pub-lic office though questionable claims and dubious promises.”
Mr. Anthony, in the Oct. 14 Call you stated thatiLeicht was “waging a vicious, personal-attack campaign against her opponent, John Campisi.” I find it wrong that Mr. Anthony would say thatiinforming the voters about the facts were “personal attacks.”
Like he stated in April, candidates forget about the false promises they made during campaigns. Mr. Campisi clearly states in this campaign and his previous one that he wouldn’t take money from developers.
However as the Post-Dispatch reported Oct. 5 in an article titled “Developers do-nate to Campisi campaign,” he has been taking money from developers in amounts totaling over $20,000 dollars.
Mr. Anthony, I ask you where was your intent to report on the progress of Mr. Cam-pisi’sicampaign contributions?
Mr. Anthony states: “Ms. Leicht really doesn’t have any issues on which to run as Mr. Campisi has done an admirable job.”
My fellow voters, one hopes that Mr. Anthony doesn’t think that lack of leadership is “admirable.” Heialso said: “Quite frankly, Ms. Leicht might have the credentials and background that would make her a good choice for councilman …”
Mr. Anthony, you’re right, she is the best choice in this race. Mr. Campisi has made unethical decisions, and now he wants us to believe that telling the facts is “personal attacks?”
Sorry Mr. Anthony, I look at the facts, and if anything your editorial is a personal attack against Ms. Leicht.