Sunday, November 03, 2013

Seattle School Board Races: A New Low?

Honestly, I don't get it. 

Why is Suzanne Dale Estey running such a negative campaign? 

A new mailer has come out has come out that tops them all.  (Apparently, some people have received this but, if they sent it citywide, some of you may not see it until Monday or Tuesday.)

It is a flyer that uses an illustration created FOR No on 1240.  It very clearly has a sticker with No on 1240 and says it across the bottom of the piece. Dale Estey's campaign knew this when they created it. 

(My campaign did not create this illustration nor did the teachers' union campaign.  It was created by one person who wanted to express their opinion.  Dora Taylor, Sue's co-writer, put it up at the Seattle Education Blog for others to see during the 1240 campaign.)  

The title Dale Estey's campaign uses  is “Evil Doers” and looks like something straight out of the National Enquirer. Below you will find the original illustration. 
The mailer is deceptive and uses Sue's photo to block-out  NO on 1240.   So voters won't know this image was created for a completely different issue than a School Board race and Sue had nothing to do with it.

It is wrong to attribute words and images that Sue neither said nor created.  

What does Sue have to say?

The Dale Estey PAC mailed yet another dishonest flyer to Seattle voters on Friday, for a total of four such attacks on my candidacy since July. This one is truly bizarre.

Sadly, some people will say or pay anything to win an election.
Apparently so, Sue.


Anonymous said...

I found this mailer in my mailbox last night. I am glad you've posted on it.

I like both Suzanne and Sue. Both are thoughtful - both have a couple of drawbacks. I have been torn on how to vote.

My gut reaction to the mailer cinched it. I will vote Sue.

Christian Sinderman, an Eckstein area resident and well known Democratic consultant is running Suzanne's campaign. He should be ashamed of himself. So should Suzanne. This crap, and it is crap, has no place in an SPS election.

Informed Voter

Anonymous said...

Anyone know how to direct this today to The Seattle Times for a Monday story in their Campaign Truthfulness series? I would think this merits coverage.


Melissa Westbrook said...

EdVoter, I would send it to Brian Rosenthal who has been doing some coverage of elections.

Anonymous said...

It sealed my vote against Suzanne. No way should this stuff happen in school board races. Shame on you all.

Anonymous said...

I live in West Seattle and received this yesterday. Unbelievable.

I doubt that the Seattle Times will expose this, though, since the other side of the flier has her endorsements listed, including the Seattle Times...

Speaking of her endorsements, I'm shocked and dismayed that four Dem districts are endorsing her. However, I learned my lesson about following their endorsements of school board candidates after they endorsed Marty McLaren. IMO, she's been completely ineffective in her representation of West Seattle.

Voted for Sue Peters, and am now especially glad I did.

-West Seattle Parent

Matt said...

Dale Estey and Murray share the same campaign consultant- Christian Sinderman. Both campaigns have the same strategy; attempt to run the appearance of a clean campaign and let PACS smear their opponents. Murray's PAC launched a misleading campaign against women of domestic violence as pawns. Guess who help fund Estey's and Murray's PAC- Nick Hanauer. This is very much about Sinderman and his political connections.

Sue Peters has been vetted over and over again. After Peters registered to run, Peters won the endorsement of EVERY legislative district and many of them were SOLE endorsements. Peters won the Seattle Education Association, M.L. King County Council Labor, I 609 and more.

The actions of Dale-Estey and her PAC are nothing less than disgusting. They come from a place of desperation and fear- not strength.


Wow said...

Are you saying the PAC attributed the photo to Sue Peters and she didn't create it?

Anonymous said...

A friend who knows Suzanne Dale Estey tried to tell me that she didn't know about how nasty this is getting, that she's "such a nice person" and it's all her campaign people who are doing this. My response: either she's not such a nice person, or she has no idea how to control her own campaign people. Neither one of these make me think she's fit to be on the school board.
So either she's faking nice, which means we can't believe a thing she says when she talks about charters and all the other corporate Ed deform fantasies her donors salivate over, or she's so clueless that she can't keep track of or control what her campaign is doing, which certainly doesn't lead me to believe she can help run a school district.
Between the nasty crap in the McGinn-Murray race, and the dirty dealings in this race, I will never ever vote for a candidate who uses Christian Sinderman as a campaign consultant. Show some class, Christian; you're even sinking lower than the GOP campaigns.

Wondering said...


In all your time in Seattle Public Schools, have you EVER seen a candidate and their supporters stoop to such a low level?

This is really disgusting.

Many people vote at the last minute and I hope this makes people realize the desperation to get Dale Estey into office, and the dirty games they are willing to employ. If this is the manner in which these individuals act before an election, how will they act after their candidate is in office?

Anonymous said...

Both of the disgusting mailers arrived in my mailbox this past week. The second one was dirty politics at its worst. If Dale-Estey is such a great candidate, she should be able to sell herself without the smear campaign. I hope it back fires.


Melissa Westbrook said...

Wow, that's what Sue says - the PAC says this (or is allowing voters to believe it). I recall this image from the 1240 fight and I know it didn't come from Sue; that I would have remembered.

Just as I have never seen this kind of money in a race, I have never seen this kind of campaigning.

And word to future candidates, decide EARLY to do this. Sue was not in the running for many candidate endorsements from legislators because they do them very early (this is true for most campaigns). She only missed the opportunity for the endorsement at the 46th LD because of entering the race later than Dale Estey. This is reflected in the number of LDs she DID get endorsed by.

From what I have seen of Dale Estey, this campaign does not seem like her outward persona. But it is HER campaign - consultants notwithstanding - and clearly she will say anything to win.

If she wins, I'm not sure she has a lot to hold her head up about.

South End said...

Dale Estey has run the most toxic school board race in the history of Seattle.

Crownhill said...

and it's all her campaign people who are doing this....right and if you believe that, I have some lovely swamp land in Arizona for you ;o)

If that's even vaguely true it does not speak well for her ability to manage difficult situations - like standing up for an unpopular idea because it's the right thing to do for the greater good. Already voted, didn't get either mailer interestingly, but that would seal the deal for me.

mirmac1 said...

I was disgusted when I saw that graphic too! But for the wrong reason. It failed to paste Nick Hanuaer, Matt Griffin, and Chris Larson's as equally ghoulish Dementors. They were Pro-1240 sugar daddies then, much like they're Estey's sugar daddies now.

Lori said...

Speaking of campaign ethics, is it ethical for a current School Board Director to collect the email addresses of parents who write to them at their official school email address and then turn around and use those addresses for political purposes? Apparently, some of the Directors are putting parents' email addresses into their own personal address books and emailing them from gmail and comcast accounts.

If this is acceptable, does that right also extend to giving those email addresses to third parties, such as, let's say, Cliff Mass, so that he can then email those parents about the election?

I just want to understand the rules. I believe the federal Can-Spam law requires people to opt in to receiving spam emails. The vendor that Director Peaslee is using, Constant Contact, also says that recipients have to opt in.

I have never opted in to receive campaign emails from any Board Directors, much less from professors at the UW, so what is going on here? Is there a Board policy about appropriate use of parents' emails? If there isn't, then one needs to be developed immediately.

Anonymous said...

Lori, I for one was glad to have received the emails from Director Peaslee and Cliff Mass. Their emails helped inform my vote by shining a light on how the Dale-Estey campaign has operated in a shady and lowly manner. I can't sanction this type of behavior with my vote and cannot not trust Ms. Estey to keep charters out of our district.

I think Sue will do a fine job and I don't question her position on this important issue.

FYI, all you need to do is click the "unsubscribe" link a the bottom of the email to opt out so I think the the span rules are being followed here.

--Grateful Voter

Melissa Westbrook said...

Lori, that's a good question. I don't know if parent e-mails mean you can use them for something else.

Lori said...

Sure, I can unsubscribe, but that's not the point. First, it is a violation of Constant Contact's rules to send unsolicited emails:

Why did you receive a mailing from us?

Our email marketing is permission based. If you received a mailing from us, our records indicate that (a) you have expressly shared this address for the purpose of receiving information in the future ("opt-in"), or (b) you have registered or purchased or otherwise have an existing relationship with us.

I never opted in to receive emails from Director Peaslee's gmail account or her comcast account. I have only ever had contact with her through her school board email address. I believe she violated the Constant Contact rules.

Second, she clearly identifies herself as affiliated with the Seattle School Board. In doing so, she is basically sending this email out in her elected official capacity, and that is not acceptable. At least when Director Smith Blum has sent these mailings out, she indicates her Board position and explicitly states that it is for identification purposes only. Director Peaslee crossed a line here by actively campaigning, using school resources (eg, parent email addresses), and using her Board position to sway opinions.

Yeah, I can unsubscribe. But that's really not the point. It is a violation of trust for a Director to use parent emails for political purposes. When I write to them about school matters, that is the extent of our relationship. They cannot put my address into their personal contact list and spam me with their personal political views at a later date. Or at least they shouldn't be able to. I don't care which candidate you support; this is wrong.

Anonymous said...

I know it has it's own thread, but my school PTA gave my email to Seattle PTA for their leading survey on the boundary issue. I'm not even a member.

Not Cool

Anonymous said...

@Not Cool

Are you saying you're not a member of your school PTA, but they have a copy of your email address? Or that you think you're not a member of the Seattle Council PTSA? Because Seattle Council PTSA is the umbrella organization for all the PTAs in Seattle and the WA state PTSA is the state-level organization, which in turn is part of the national PTA. One you belong to your PTA, I believe you're basically a sort of member of all levels upward.

PTA member

Linh-Co said...

I've received an email from both Michael Debell and his wife asking me to vote for Dale-Estey. Just in the last 3 days, I've received a call from Ron Simms asking me to support Suzanne Dale-Estey. I also received a call from Governor Gregoire asking me to vote for Ed Murray. These people were using their political positions to sway my votes. Big deal. I don't particularly care for it but it's open season for campaigning.

Anonymous said...

Nobody likes dirty campaigning but that is reality, think it always has been. Fight fire with fire, unless the high road works for you, but let's not get all indignant here. Suzanne's backers are scary but so is Sue. What if she goes to the mat for APP? I don't want that and it could tear the district in half, literally.

48 hours

Melissa Westbrook said...

48 hours, that's last statement is pretty silly considering Sue has rarely spoken about AL unless asked. She has not made it a focus of her campaign and there's no reason why it would if she were a Board member.

"Fight fire with fire", you say? What did Sue's campaign do that looks remotely like these flyers?

Anonymous said...

No,I am not a member, that is one of the questions on the survey, too. PTA compiles the directory, I'm pretty sure.

Not Cool

Anonymous said...

Where's Arch Stantong when we need a really good graphic?


Anonymous said...

Take heart. Although I agree the graphic and wording was disgusting, it also didn't make much sense. I'm pretty sure I could only figure out what they were alleging because I read this blog. It's hard to believe it would sway anyone.

Have to wonder if all that money Dale Estey collected is being put to good use. Is this the best they can do?

Ed said...

Those of us that have watched him know that Christian has ALWAYS been the same (say anything to win).

One can only hope that this time it comes back to bite him.

Shame on you Christian and Suzanne!!!

Anonymous said...

What if we all commented on Estey's campaign FB page asking for a comment regarding the Evil Doer flyer?

Voted Peters

Anonymous said...

I am shocked..shocked that politics is a dirty business


Sensible APP parent said...

48 hours said: "What if (Sue) goes to the mat for APP? I don't want that and it could tear the district in half, literally."

Why do you think APP advocates would "tear the district in half"? I'm pretty tired of people demonizing APP.

APP parents are simply advocating for their kids' needs. And those positions often line up with those of other communities. APP parents, for instance, are not behind the idea of putting APP in already crowded middle schools in the north end. In fact, they oppose the idea.

Mary Griffin said...

State law prohibits the use of facilities of any public agency to directly or indirectly assist
any campaign for or against a candidate or even ballot proposition. School board candidates must make a complete separation between campaign activities and the school district. If Sharon Peaslee used any official resources in campaigning for Sue Peters, that would be a violation of state law. I am not sure about an email list--if that is the property of the district or of it is personal property. See here for further info: Because the email is from her gmail or comcast account, I can't see how you would easily get traction on that account. It sounds like you don't remember signing up for Constant Contact, so the email may be violating that company's terms of service.

Frankly, I am fairly annoyed at the amount of emails I get from the Ed Murray campaign, and you can get your bottom dollar I never signed up to get anything from him. Despite the fact that I have tried several times to be removed, I'm still getting two or three per day. Am I going to complain about it? No, as it will all die off soon.

Additionally, I get emails from Suzanne Dale-Estey, and I never signed up to get on an email list from her either, but I had emailed her in the past.

As far as Ron Sims or Chris Gregoire, they are both retired from office. There should be no ethical problem with that.

Po3 said...

The way I see it is Peters would utilize her knowledge of APP to increase rigor district wide, which would be great. Etsay has no experience with any advanced learning and would not be a good person to advocate to rigor in any school or program.

Anonymous said...

Peters' main work has been toward better math for all, better arts for all, defending teachers from Ed Reformer-generated disrespect and harassment, opposing the over-emphasis and over-use of standardized testing as the be-all-and-end-all, broadening curriculum to interest and reach more children, replicating what Everett and Renton have done to reduce their dropout rates down to the single digits by using counselors and staff to follow up with kids and families (vs. relying on computers and robo-calls like we do in SPS), and developing a strategic plan that reflects the diversity of the district to better serve the various needs of children throughout the district.

You'll notice nothing APP-specific in all of the above.

As a fellow APP parent, I know the best way to help sustain the program for my kids is to help others build and sustain the programs that suit the needs of other people's kids, whether in a conventional school, an option school, or an alt like Nova. Selfishness and pushiness have never been Sue's calling card. Persistence and demanding accountability? You bet. She's not afraid to stand up to bullies, and the bullies do not like it! Those who call her "abrasive" and such are usually the same ones involved in things like siding with principals who are found guilty of misconduct. Abrasive? Go figure.


Anonymous said...

And also, as an APP parent, people should know that we suffer through Discovery and CMP math just like everybody else. We got no waivers from it, like some schools did, although TM is apparently now using something different - too late for my kids!

On most issues, as goes the district, so goes APP. So, there is, in fact, a massive amount of common ground between APP and other schools and programs. So, if the district at large is suffering from any particular malady, rest assured that the odds are that APP is too.

What does that mean for this race? It means many of you probably have a lot more in common with Sue Peters than you think.

Rock'n'Roll HighSchool said...

"Sensible APP Parent": For the current head of the SNAPP PTA, last year's head of the SNAPP PTA, and a cabal of APP advocates who have secured seats (and thus a disproportionate voice) on FACMAC, the term demonization is redundant. Until concerned north-end APP Parents band together to unseat, defang and muzzle these bad actors, some people are going to continue to perceive the APP community in general and "APP advocates" in particular, and as entitled, selfish, and unconcerned with the larger community.

Sue Peters, on the other hand, truly is a Sensible APP parent. "48 hours": please know that the aforementioned bad actors from north end APP support Suzanne Dale-Estey not Sue Peters. If you don't want to support what you see as the "APP" agenda (which is really more of a Bryant-Eckstein agenda but may be just an entitled, selfish, and unconcerned-with-the-larger-community then please vote for Sue.

Rock'n'Roll HighSchool said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Rock'n'Roll HighSchool said...

Blog admin. The 12:37 post from rock 'n' roll high school was the one to delete, the 12:45 corrected some typos

LN said...

I actually like the Board members sending out their opinion. For example, if I like Michael DeBell and he recommends Estey, that will resonate with me. If I don't like DeBell or how he's operated as a Board Member, it would make me not want to vote for Estey.

Lori, since you're on the Estey side, would you be upset if these people sent you e-mails supporting Estey?

I think it's helpful to know who the continuing Board members think they would work with best. Otherwise, we could find our school board acting like Washington DC. If I really don't like the way Kay Smith-Blum, for example, has voted on issues I care about, I would vote for Estey. Instead, I look to see who is funding these campaigns and if I think their agenda is in the best interest of my child. If it is, fine, I'll vote for the bought and paid for candidate. Since I don't like the Gates, Hanauer agenda, I voted Peters

Eli M. said...

Nick Hanauer has written a book titled: Gardens of Democracy.

Has anyone read this book?

I find it ironic that Nick Hanauer wrote a book about
Democracy while throwing dollars into Estey's PAC.

Melissa Westbrook said...

Eli, I have read the book co-written with Eric Lui (who I greatly admire). It's a decent little book about looking at how to make a difference in a different way.

Nick Hanauer's interests swing all over the place but I feel like he thinks his money should hold sway when he can't convince people of his argument.

Anonymous said...

As a South Seattle resident, I have to wonder where Sue Peters is campaigning. I realize her pot of money is much, much smaller than Suzanne Estey's, but I have not seen a single sign for Sue Peters anywhere south of the Ship Canal, nor have I received any mailers, calls, or emails from her or any supporters. Is she THAT lacking in funding, or are we south-enders being skipped over? If I wasn't a reader of this blog, I wouldn't even know Sue Peters beyond her name on the ballot.

Does anyone know why this is?

Voting Tomorrow

Melissa Westbrook said...

Voting Tomorrow, it's called money.

Dale Estey had paid sign placers. She had an independent PAC that did mailers for her (her own campaign did not pay for them).

Sue is for ALL parts of this district and has been endorsed by the Seattle Medium and Rita Green, RBHS PTA president among others.

I'm sure Sue wishes she had the money to do more outreach but campaigns are getting more expensive all the time.

mirmac1 said...

Hi Voting Tomorrow,

Speaking as someone who accompanied Sue to a 37th District Democrats meeting, I can attest that she has MORE concern and MORE sensitivities than Estey and her paid handlers.

I think blog readers know me by now. I am an immigrant and strongly identify as a minority (SPS beware!) Sue Peters made plans to attend the 37th and I was going to be there to talk about what matters to us. Sure I live in SW WS, but I feel fortunate to consider myself a friend of Betty Patu and Rita Green. I certainly relate more to my BFFs than Michael DeBell, Jean Bryant, and the NE APP contingent.

Sue's done more than plant signs in SE Seattle planting strips. She has made it a personal mission to ensure our children are not defined by NCLB, Common Core, Arne Duncan and our local power clique.

I hope you will join me in voting for Sue Peters.

Anonymous said...

48 hours -

I've come away with a complete dislike of some parts of the APP crowd with their obnoxious entitled crap over the last few years. I had no idea that Sue was an APP parent, and I've been around her at several campaign events. I think your concerns about Sue being part of the entitled crowd is


Anonymous said...

Like the DeBell and Peaslee outreach to voters which has generated comment, something interesting I've noticed in the past weeks is the effect of this blog's own endorsement of Peters vs Estey on the race.

There's a whole crowd of people who will never vote for Peters, not because of her own ideas, but because of their dislike of this blog and some of its commenters. Not only does this viewpoint seem to include the education academic and venture crowd, as well as business heavyhitters, it also includes regions such as the northeast, where emails and conversations denigrate the 'awful' people associated with the blog.

Depending on a voter's news proclivities, they may vote or roll their eyes at The Stranger or The Times endorsements. But the reaction I've seen to this blog's endorsements is stronger. I wonder why this is, especially because there is more substantive discussion about SPS here than anywhere else, and it's certainly not all negative. Is it the discussion style here? The topics? Fear? Annoyance? Is it really personal? I don't know a way to understand the reaction, but I wish there was a way to do research to understand why. It would be helpful for future candidates, and possibly this blog too.


Anonymous said...

I think the North Northeast is more pro Peters than the South Northeast. I am north of 85th and most people I have talked to in my neighborhood are voting for Peters.


Anonymous said...

My experience is that many of the NE people live in a bubble and want to exist solely in their bubble, where everyone agrees with them - or at least doesn't speak up against them - when they express an opinion. They don't support their arguments well, thus if they are brought here, they are usually shot down. Their bubble is threatened, so they retreat back to their bubble so they can express their opinions and have their same thoughts echoed back to them.
Dissent is uncomfortable for many, and dissent is exactly what happens here. This blog tends to draw a wider variety of viewpoints, and not everyone is capable of reading other people's viewpoints and conceding that perhaps their idea is wrong or needs adjusting based on new info. I learn new things every time I read things here - both from posts and comments - but then I am also interested in the district as a whole, not just my little section, which is how I saw many of those NE people in my interactions with them. (Note - this is my opinion, and my opinion only based in my interactions in my neighborhood.)

I am now in a different area of the city, and I notice a difference in all conversations - not just ones about the district - more diverse opinions, more live and let live attitudes, which I have always associated with Seattle in general.


Anonymous said...

I think what people don't like is ad hominem attacks, like "people who live in X are ignorant and selfish and don't look out for others." I admit it turns me off sometimes, makes me support ideas less than I might otherwise. And is generally false anyway, a lazy way to dismiss sn argument that you don't agree with. II am part of both the most vilified and most praised groups on here, and honestly the people are not different or more selfish in either group. There are just as many self absorbed jerks at my (not VNESS) neighborhood school as my app one, and whenever it's under threat they come out with the exact same kind of crazy. It's just under threat less. I am in the middle north-most of the people I know are voting Peters, including me. I hope she wins.


Anonymous said...

@CompletelyUnwarranted: Sue is definitely not part of THAT crowd. And she represents the majority of APP parents, many if not most of whom have kids outside APP as well.

Things got really bad with the North End APP after leaving Lowell and being in limbo at Lincoln and Hamilton. The reactionary "pushiness" and "loud" advocacy is the result of not having any peace of mind about where those kids will go to MS and HS, after 30+ years of knowing with certainty what the pathway was for the APP kids.

Yes, they may sound entitled and over-the-top at times, but the situation was foreseeable, preventable and very poorly handled. Dismantling Spectrum programs in the North, right or wrong, added gasoline to the fire.

Tension and controversy will always exist with popular programs and APP is no exception. Plenty of families are disappointed and angry about not getting into Aviation HS too. There's a chicken vs. egg scenario where equity and diversity compete for time and attention with program quality and integrity. Many rightfully ask: What good is equitable access if the program is no longer very good because the curriculum and teacher training work has been ignored for years?

If the program were growing, diversifying and progressing harmoniously as we wish it would, the advocacy/entitlement wouldn't be so loud or offensive to others. But, like so many other programs and populations in SPS, it isn't.

What do APP parents have to cry about? A program that been weakened and diluted from what it was just a few years ago despite the district promising to protect program integrity and quality as it grew. Some of this is capacity-related, but a lot was inappropriate leadership and head-in-the-sand wishful thinking.

Huge challenges remain throughout the district that will remain for awhile yet. Nickle & Dime strategies like school closures, and flash-in-the-pan "magic bullet" philosophies - like Discovery Math - will distract and dismay, but will not solve anything. Real solutions require long-term thinking and, even more important, long-term commitments.

So, do you want someone who's been around the district for 10 years, or someone with 2 years - about the same length of time as most SPS administrators while they prep their resumes for a better paying gig elsewhere?

This is where experience matters.

Anonymous said...

WSDWG above.

former dragon said...

*sarcasm font* Golly, I sure am glad there are anonymous folks like CT on this blog to tell me how I am based on what quadrant of the city I live in. Gee whiz, if I had known what a self absorbed a-hole I was going to become, I would have hunkered down in Ballard and taken on a mortgage I couldn't afford. Yes, please leave me alone in my bubble, I have a nice library, some wonderful parks, and Snappy Dragon. I'm all set. *end sarcasm font*
Voted for Peters proudly.

Anonymous said...

Whatever dragon. I didn't say all - I said MANY of the ones I encountered, and said it was my opinion based on my interactions there. Clearly others may have had different experiences and also have opinions. I lived off of 75th and about 38th NE for several years. In a basement apartment/MIL rental - can't afford to buy a house in this city. Prior to that, I'd lived on Capitol Hill, Lower Queen Anne, Pinehurst, Shoreline, First Hill, Wallingford, and Interbay. All the neighborhoods have their own personality - in my opinion! - and some are more welcoming and open than others, some are much more aloof and hard to gain entry to. I found myself very much uninvited to some of the neighborhood functions in this particular neighborhood when it was discovered I held different opinions than those of my neighbors - they had no desire to hear a different point of view. Contrast that with my current neighborhood, which is Greenwood-Phinney-Crown Hill-ish, and where the neighbor down the street - an avowed GOP loyalist - threw an election night grilling party, where the only stipulation was that you had voted. Very different feeling indeed.
As one who does move frequently, I make it a point to get to know the neighbors and the neighborhood - that is part of the fun, exploring a new place and finding out new aspects to the city - so that is something that is important to me and something I am quite attuned to. It may have changed over the last few years as there was a lot of movement given the economy - I can only relay my experiences from that time in my neighborhood. And for the record, I've never lived in Ballard. At least not yet, anyway, though I am feeling the need to move again. And I love Snappy Dragon AND Cloud City, though the latter was not there when I lived in Pinehurst.

mirmac1 said...

Arbor Heights Rules!

Anonymous said...

Where's Arch Stanton when we need a really good graphic?
11/3/13, 11:01 PM

Sorry, been slacking. The link to the original doesn't seem to be working. I'm fairly sure that I saw it earlier. Based on the original and the description of the recent version; if that's what passes for big bucks PAC mailings, then the job prospects for photoshop hacks must be pretty good.