Don Keenan has responded. He sent an excerpt from an email he sent early in July to those supporting his candidacy, including John Watts.

” ... I hope you will join in my commitment to a positive campaign. I’ve worked on many campaigns and I’ve never seen personal attacks win. Voters want candidates to stick to issues and that’s what I plan to do. Believe me, it takes discipline not to respond, but in the end nobody benefits from participating in negative exchanges. I have a long record of public service and a positive vision for the future of Bellingham. I am proud of that service and desire to continue to be of service to the people of our community.”

He further wrote that Watts’ actions were “clearly not” on behalf of his campaign. Obviously he is saying his campaign has nothing to do with John Watts’ actions.

I’ve not heard from John Watts today and he has not made any changes nor new posts to his new blog.

9:45 am - by John Servais
Shame on John Watts. He is smearing the McShane campaign with unsupported charges. On Wed night he posted his smear on his new blog and promised substance on Thursday. When it did not appear, I wrote him and he assured me he was “working on it now”. Tis Friday morn, nothing further is posted, and I will not let this irresponsible act continue without comment.

Oh he posted the smear as if it were just a question to be answered yes or no at a later time. To post a damaging statement about others without accompanying evidence is a smear. At best it is very sloppy. At worst it is intended to encourage a rumor. How about: “Is so-and-so not faithful to their spouse? Anything to this buzz? We will look into this and tell you the truth or false nature of this in a few days.” That is not what Watts posted but is an example of this type of smear.

Watts is doing what is considered the worst about blogging - posting cheap unsubstantiated personal attacks on the Internet that are intended to damage others. I will not blacken my page with his absurd charge but will note the irony of the next paragraph on his page where he cites Kipling about his friends being the facts. And you can read it for yourself - until he takes it down in embarrassment.

Watts is part of the Keenan campaign group. If they have nothing to do with this smear then let them denounce it and distance themselves from John Watts. If they do not - and do it quickly and with strong words - then they will share in this.

Personally I do not know the facts first hand. And I’m probably voting for another candidate than either of them. But as a connected long-time political junkie, the smear to me is totally false and I have made an effort to learn the facts. I could dismantle it categorically - piece by piece. Its posting will probably cause Dan McShane to lose support from his environmental supporters. McShane is considered the most serious threat to Keenan by many of us. This smear is perfectly timed in the election cycle and only a savvy and experienced campaign manager would know that. A legitimate question is: are others involved with Watts in this? And if so, who are they? If Watts has second thoughts about all this then he should come clean with the facts and who else may be involved.

This is a sad ending to John’s 9 years of public service. He may know a lot about city council business but he obviously knows little about how dangerous it is to post rumors about others on the Internet. Shame on him. If he posts a retraction and apology then I will note that and link to his post.