If they are so "unfounded" why not address them point for point? Should
be pretty easy to prove the MVPA's case since there is no substance to
the charges. Unfortunately, due to the long lag and subsequent empty
response (i.e. void of any relevant substance) I can only conclude that
Jim Gilmore's "accusations" are 100% correct. He was railroaded for
internal political reasons, not his qualifications, and the MVPA
membership was denied their right to decide for themselves if he is fit
to hold office.
I would urge Mr. Holland and the others at MVPA to treat this situation a
little more seriously and openly. When one side presents a detailed case
(accusations if you will) and the other side only says "poppycock,
everything is just swell"... what choice do I have? I must go with the
side that presented the best case. That would be Mr. Gilmore, hands
down. I really wish I didn't have to come to this conclusion, as I would
like to think of the MVPA as being a fair organization with its member's
best interests held above all else, not one run through inside political
games.
Very disappointed,
Steve
Not an MVPA member. Would like to be, but it is a tough call if I will
become one now...
===
To unsubscribe from the mil-veh mailing list, send the single word
UNSUBSCRIBE in the body of a message to <mil-veh-request@skylee.com>.