Saturday, October 29, 2011

Deceptive practices by No on 96 coalition

The real FactCheck.org has issued an objection to the deceptive use of their name by the No on 96 crowd. Read here to learn more.

If the No on 96 group can't be trusted to tell the truth about who they are, how can they be trusted to tell the truth about the real implications of voting no on 96?

If you value the future viability of South Euclid, vote yes on Issue 96.