Hillary Clinton has made her experience and competence key selling points to voters. But the ongoing disarray and incompetence in Clinton’s campaign undermines that argument and raises real doubts about whether she’s ready to lead on day one.
According to the New York Times, some of Clinton’s top donors are disappointed by the lavish spending in her latest campaign finance report — such as $5 million for political consultants in January alone, and $25,000 for rooms at the luxury Bellagio hotel in Las Vegas. Even some of her staunchest supporters complain that the loose spending points to “costly errors of judgment†and amounts to “a road map of her political and management failings,†according to the article.
303 Comments
Thw whole thing was that Hillary got into the race expecting a cake walk to the nomination. It was pretty much taken for granted that she would be the one. But the voters had other ideas. And I will also point out that Obama has run a top notch almost flawless operation and with David Axelrod running it, I am not surprised. Secondly Obama did a 50 state campaign while Hillary only concentrated on the big primary states. Voters don’t like to be ignored and Obama did not ignore them (when was the last time a Presidential candidate went to Montana?). He has run a good campaign and hopefully he will run the country the same way.
If the smartest woman in the world can’t run a competent campaign, is there any hope for a woman to ever be president?
Kev, I believe I’ve read that Obama has also built out a new grassroots political machine here in the South. I believe Obama assumed from the get-go that Hillary would enjoy a dollar advantage throughout the nomination. His team believed that in order to compete with Hillary at a dollar disadvantage that they’d have to do some really groundbreaking grassroots stuff (for the Dems, in the South and in red states generally).
Now that Obama’s achieved his own dollar advantage, when added to his grassroots machine the consequent leverage is probably insurmountable (I believe he’s now spending about $730,000/day on media services, compared to Clinton’s $400,000/day).
Gotta give Obama full credit for his foresight and his courage. These days the nomination process itself is about as challenging a project as the office itself; unfortunately it requires a completely different skill set. This skill set, the political skill set, is one that Bush honed to a tee. Of the two general skill sets involved, the political and the executive, Bush remains after 7 fully engaged years adept at only one: that boy is still struggling mightily with the executive office itself. For example, “You’re doin’ a heckuva job, Brownie” followed by “exit stage right” ain’t exactly the hallmark of the skilled CEO.
At any rate, Obama sure looks like a winner so far.
Well Hank, maybe the smartest woman in the world should give it a try and run for President.
The critical error made by the Clinton campaign had nothing to do with hotel room costs. She made the cardinal mistake in any competition – underestimating your opponent. Any other political strategy that might not have been well-conceived was first set in motion by underestimation the capacity of her opponent to be a serious contender in fundraising, grassroots organizing, and crafting a message that resonates with voters better.
I can see why her spending patterns could annoy donors, but that really has nothing to do with the fact she is in trouble. She is in trouble because Obama caught on because his supporters are enthusiastic to a fault, while hers are there pretty much as a product of a sense of obligation or inevitability (up until recently). Clinton evidently raises very little passion in her supporters, but intense passion in her opponents. Not a recipe for success.
Did you notice where the Eagle posted this article?
Presidential Race, Religious Right
Religious Right?????
The true test of a politician is during the campaigns. It’s rare that they have a gift for governing, but all of them have a gift for getting elected. She has never faced a real campaign until now. All that has been shown in the past year is that Hillary does not need to be anywhere near the wheels of power.
Ya know, I met one of the Scholfield Car Dealers in a Quick Trip once. He said he would give $100 referral to anyone which resulted in a car sales.
This is a general problem our society and it is amplified in our Politics.
That is, everyone feels a need to grease palms in order to get something done.
All of the Candidates are throwing money blindly on their campaign problems and in an effort to find solutions or that quick fix.
H.Clinton’s problem is that she wants to be viewed as a multi-millionaire “Rock Star” all the while spending other people’s campaign contribution money to do it.
This is the person that you want as President with access to Trillions of dollars? I don’t think so.
Obama and McCain aren’t any better.
Perhaps the time has come to force the use of Federal Funds only for Presidential and Congressional Races? As distasteful as it may be, having a big pot for limited spending may control this circus.
Let’s say there are 20 Candidates on both sides and the size of the pot is 200 million dollars. That means each Candidate would get $10 million dollars to run for the office of the President regardless of Political Party affiliation.
As it is now, Campaign spending is out of control. Romney spent a fortune on a failed attempt. Some candidates appeared infrequently because of lack of funds.
Something needs to be changed to eliminate the environment of excess.
Spending tens of millions of dollars in a month by some Candidates only shows that the Candidate is in capable of budgeting and wise spending.
oh LOOK Randy gave us ANOTHER hit thread on Senator Clinton.
I used to respect you Randy. Nowadays not so much. Did you get your I “heart” Obama tattoo yet?
Shill.
Haven’t heard about your science debate in awhile. Back burner that to lead the Obama parade have you? Senator Clinton says we need to end george bush’s war on science and again be an innovation nation.
Barack mumbles the same doggerel about coming together with people who cannot leave the 16th century behind.
One of the problems with your analysis is that I do not believe federal campaign finance laws can legally limit how much a candidate or his spouse can spend on their own campaign – I think this is a free speech constitutional right. So why how would it be fair to control Romney’s spending – or John Kerry’s – but to limit everyone else’s? When sooo many congressmen and women are also millionares, this seems to me to be a prescription for incumbent protection. Now, perhaps campaign limits on state races might work. I understand Arizona and perhaps another state or two have had some very interesting experiences with similar laws.
I meant: “why would it be fair NOT to control Romney’s or Kerry’s spending but to limit everyone else’s?”
I don’t know the solution kelly. However, American Politics have progressed a long ways from the Douglas/Lincoln debates and I say for the worse because of out of control campaign spending.
The advantage should be to the orator in my opinion. A person who has superior debating skills shows that he/she can react on their feet and if they can deliver what they promise in their speeches, all the better.
I don’t propose that every candidate be a cross between Garrison Keiler and JFK, but really, some candidates need a speech coach.
The reason why I say this, is look how much mileage Barak Obama has gotten out of effective speaking ability. Obama is short on experience and accomplishment, but he has “sold the package.”
When a candidate such a H.Clinton spends more money on Hotel Rooms than a lot of people that vote for her in annual salary, then one has to take a step back and say, “Do I really want this spend-thrift in the White House?”
Political office shouldn’t be relegated to billionaires, millionaires and those with huge campaign War chests.
However, that’s what it has become and look what is available for our choices.
Sad imo.
What is the comparison of other campaigns on what they are spending? Is it really all that out of line with them? I love how none of that information has been presented.
Pmom,
All the candidates that are left, with the exception of Huckabee and Paul are out of control with Campaign spending. A little research is required, but it is a beast that would ‘piss off’ most voters on the excess of lavish and unnecessary campaign spending.
Public money only for elections? That would only result in creating an elite ruling class.
What should be done is anyone can give any amount to any campaign. As long as the campaign is required to keep records of all donors and amounts. No corporate/unions/3rd party donations allowed. Those parties could do whatever media they want (TV/print/internet/radio, etc), but donor lists there would also be open to the public.
Tiahrt beat Glickman in the same way Obama is beating Hillary, only on a much grander scale. Grassroots, involve the people, excite the people, allow them to feel ownership in the goal and the roadblocks that must be overcome — a winning formula.
And, sadly, look what we got stuck with in Tiahrt. He forgot the people as soon as they worked hard to get him the job!
Take heed.
You have it exactly backward Proudman.
What should be done is anyone can give any amount to any campaign. As long as the campaign is required to keep records of all donors and amounts. No corporate/unions/3rd party donations allowed.
That would guarantee only the rich could run for office. Which of course would tend to the election of Republicans.
Which is exactly what a greed head like you would like.
Meanwhile, in the McCain campaign:
“Renzi, who is one of 24 co-chairmen for Sen. John McCain’s presidential campaign in Arizona, has denied wrongdoing. His attorney, Kelly Kramer, issued a brief statement saying Renzi would “fight these charges until he is vindicated and his family’s name is restored.”
The congressman had been considered in political peril ever since FBI agents raided his wife’s insurance business in the southern Arizona town of Sonoita in October 2006. He immediately stepped down from the House Intelligence Committee, and followed that by taking a leave of absence from the House Financial Services and Natural Resources committees.
Authorities accuse Renzi of using his position as a member of the Natural Resources Committee to push land deals for Sandlin. Renzi wanted Sandlin to make money so the congressman could be paid for an earlier land deal they made together, according to the indictment.
“Renzi was having financial difficulty throughout 2005 and needed a substantial infusion of funds to keep his insurance business solvent and to maintain his personal lifestyle,” the indictment reads.”
http://www.kansas.com/wireupdates/story/319066.html
Linda,
What people did Tiahrt forget?
I am friends with his campaign manager here in town and just spoke with him and his wife last month.
Tiahrt is a very nice man who cares deeply about helping the people of Kansas.
I know that my father worked hard to get him the job, not so sure about how hard you worked to get him there though.
“I know that my father worked hard to get him the job,”
Also known as influence peddling.
And Tiahrt takes good care of the well heeled folks who bought him his office.
Other constituents not so much.
JR,
How is Tiahrt not taking care of you?
Oh yeah, let me guess…
Health care? You still havn’t got yourself any health care yet?
Tiahrt beat Glickamn because dan had become “no longer a Kansas.” Note that Dan did not retrn to Kansas; he stayed away.
In my opinion Tiahrt has done the same thing – he has lived in Washington so long he is no longer a Kansan.
This is not a Dem-Rep thing – I think it is all too common when they become career politicians.
Ben,
What exactly makes you think Tiahrt is no longer a Kansan?
Regular
You are trying to “fix” a problem that does not exist.
Campaigns are designed to test candidates.
Campaigns and political skills, alone, do not make a perfect President, but it does let us see something, as far as leadership and management are concerned.
Also, fundraising shows support.
Would it REALLY be fair for Ron Paul and Dennis Kucinich to have the “same” amount of money as other candidates?
No, of course not.
The First Amendment means what it says.
Money is speech.
You should NOT be able to limit money, in a campaign, in any way at all.
(I would support a law that said you had to post every contribution, on the internet, for public viewing, within 24 hours of receipt.)
How many terms has he run for reelection PAST the term limits he imposed on himself?
Oh, I know, there is soooo much left to be done and he just can’t let the people down and his life is too good to stop now. If only he had known maybe he wouldn’t have signed onto that part of the agreement. Or maybe his word really doesn’t mean much.
That Contract with America stuff is so unneeded once you’ve accomplished the goal of being elected.
Of course Nathan likes Tiahrt. No big surprise there.
BTW, Regular. Are you saying you never heard of car salesmen giving bird dog fees? Some do, the successful ones, and some don’t.
Nuthin’ crooked about that. Just good bidness.
JR
Most of the financial wealth, held by members of Congress, is held by DEMOCRATS!
This was true even before the last election cycle.
Linda,
Tiahrt voted for term limits with the other Republicans as part of The Contract With America.
Guess who voted against it? The Democrats.
What sense does it make for the Republicans to impose something on themselves, which would leave them at a huge political disadvantage, that the democrats stoped from being enacted across the board?
It makes no sense at all.
Yours and others constantly calling for Tiahrt to impose Term limits on himself which he never agreed to do is nothing but pure liberal BS. You only call for that because you don’t like Tiahrt.
On top of that, how does not imposing term limits on himself, which he never promised to do, prove that he has forgotten the people of Kansas?
Nathan
I would agree.
The Tiahrts have not forgotten anyone.
They are very sincere people, and always there to listen.
They have also done a great deal to help other Republicans get elected to office.
JR
Tiahrt was OUTSPENT by Glickman.
You are a broken record!
Linda
If you support lowering the speed limit to, say 55 MPH again, and then that law does not pass —
Should you DRIVE at 55, just because you supported such a law?
You are ridiculous. Tiahrt NEVER made a pledge as you claim. He supported term limits for everyone. He still does.
Tiahrt will follow a Term Limits Law when and if one ever passes.
Democrats favor the interests of ALL the people.
Republicans like Tiahrt work only for the interests of the rich. As we have seen posted here.
Senator Clinton is for public financing and so am I. Every voice MUST be equal or else freedom of speech becomes a priviledge and not a right.
Tiahrt signed a pledge holding himself to term limits.
SO his abrogation of that pledge is a demonstration as to his character.
WTF?
“Money is speech.”
And you all are trying to REASON with these people?
hehehehehheheehheehehehehehehehehehe….
“Would it REALLY be fair for Ron Paul and Dennis Kucinich to have the “same” amount of money as other candidates?
No, of course not.”
And you have yourself called campaign finance “speech”
I guess the right to speak is subjective for you as to who YOU thinks deserves a hearing.
JR
So, if YOU decided to run for President, would YOU deserve the same public finance money as everyone else?
Of course not!
Nor would I deserve such funding.
Public financing would set up an elite group of “king makers” who would decide who was “viable” and who was not.
That is not Democracy.
Public financing is just another dumb idea, that actually destroys true representative government.
They are all in favor of term limits…
Until they’re not.
They are all in favor of free speech…
Until they’re not.
They are all in favor of campaign reform…
Until they’re not.
They are all in favor of Obama…
Until they’re not.
see a pattern here?
JR
You are a liar.
If what you say is true, prove it, post it.
Otherwise, you owe Tiahrt an apology.
Tiahrt never made such a pledge
Put up or shut up!
“That is not Democracy.”
It is closer to Democracy than unlimited private financing.
That’s plutocracy.
There is no reasoning. We all post our opinions and they stand for themselves. Make sense to some and not to others. And the beat goes on.
I wasnt taking a shot at you Linda. Just pointing out that it is futile to use facts and logic when some folks are so illogical and fact challenged.
I understand and accept that my opinions are AS GOOD and AS USELESS as any others. ;-)
KFG
Bring yourself up to speed, on the First Amendment, would you?
“The facts in this case demonstrate why it was a mistake for the court to allow Congress to go down this road in the first place. When Congress regulates political speech, its interests are in limiting debate, protecting incumbents and insulating the members from criticism or even public pressure. That’s why the Founders tried to keep them out of this business from the beginning.
The only campaign finance rule that is truly consistent with the First Amendment is a requirement that politicians disclose all the contributions they receive so that voters can decide for themselves if they think a candidate or an incumbent has been corrupted by the money.”
McCain Feingold was overturned, in part, by the Supreme Court. YES, “Money IS Speech” in many ways.
This is a campaign finance law, remember, and part of it was overturned, on First Amendment grounds!
http://www.sacbee.com/110/story/253286.html
Repeat after me:
Money is Speech
Money is Speech
Money is Speech
HEH
I guess Tiahrts pal Mark Foley DID term limit himself.
Sorta.
Kinda seedy how he did it though…
What’s Tiahrt gonna do otherwise?
Come back to Goddard and hang around the house?
It’s been done.
“The New York Times says that John McCain had a close, personal relationship with a beautiful, young, female lobbyist. Do you believe this? Think about it. A senator, who’s a Republican having sex with a woman.”
Jay Leno
Funny stuff!
The Tiahrts have not forgotten anyone.
They are very sincere people, and always there to listen.
Right.
Let’s say you’re a lobbyist for big tobacco and you don’t want a tax on cigarettes that would help pay for SCHIP.
Todd Tiahrtless will listen. (Leave the check on your way out.)
Let’s say you’re George WMD Bush declaring war on a country who poses no threat or forcing religion into the public schools.
Todd Tiahrtless will listen. (He voted with the Bush machine 99 percent of the time.)
Let’s say you’re Newt Gingerich and you push the idea of a constitutional amendment to “balance the federal budget” but then he VOTES to run up the biggest national debt load we’ve ever seen and could ever image.
Todd Tiahrtless will nod his head gravely . . . then he will collect more lobbyist money at his favorite table at Jack Abramoff’s restraunt.
He’s a good listener all right. Whatever Bush and neo-cons tell him to do, he does it.
JR,
I would be interested in seeing this pledge Tiahrt signed which said he would hold himeslf to term limits.
Do you have a copy?
Tiahrt signed no such pledge. Tiahrt did agree to support term limits which he and the other Republicans did.
The Democrats blocked it.
So, all you Democrats giving Tiahrt a hard time, did you get upset with all the other Democrats blocking the term limit vote?
“Repeat after me:
Money is Speech”
Cool. I think I’ll go down to Scotch and Sirloin, enjoy a big, expensive meal and pay with . . . .
speech.
Nathan – it’s largely a feeling – just as I had with glickman when he was still in office. It will be interesting to see if he returns to kansas if he gets defeated as Glickman did not.
I saw a similar thing happen with an Illinois congressman whose freshman campaign I had worked on. He transformed from being a fairly conservative mid-westerner into being a Washington insider. You might be familiar with him – Dennis Hastert.
“Do you have a copy?”
No. I just took him at his given word.
Foolish on my part. Never trust a Republican.
JR, you are trying to worm out of what you said:
—–
J R
Posted February 23, 2008 at 10:13 am | Permalink
Tiahrt signed a pledge holding himself to term limits.
SO his abrogation of that pledge is a demonstration as to his character.
—–
J R
Posted February 23, 2008 at 10:48 am | Permalink
“Do you have a copy?”
No. I just took him at his given word.
Foolish on my part. Never trust a Republican
—-
Once again, you shot your mouth off without any real concern for the truth.
Once again, you made an ass out of yourself!
“People do not seem to realize that their opinion of the world is also a confession of character.”
Ralph Waldo Emerson
See, even Ralph Waldo Emerson had an opinion — no better or worse than another person’s opinion.
Maybe opinions, like beauty, are in the eyes of the beholder?
Ok — For Nathan and Econ >>>>
Please READ this — It has the Term Limits in the Contract With America… It was not further supported by Tiahrt or any of the others who signed on to it… The “Contract” in and of itself was NOT a piece of Legislation… but a document of the REPUBLICAN members of Congress… So, to say the Democrats didnt vote for it, is simply the same thing as saying Bart Starr threw more touchdown passes than Nolan Ryan… :-)
http://www.house.gov/house/Contract/CONTRACT.html
“Clinton campaign failing competence test”
Well I guess we reaally won’t know if this is true until the convention. Whatever it takes to win.
As many of us have been saying for months (or years), Clinton is incompetent. No shocker there.
And while Obama may be better at running a campaign, his incredibly liberal agenda will ensure his defeat in November.
Believe it.
http://www.mcphee.com/items/11537.html
Deluxe Jesus action figure with glowing miracle hands.
Hope they don’t make an action Crucifix Jesus.
Rhino — You suppose that is the new American “idol” ??? LOL
Uh oh maybe it was made in China LOL
Chas
Again, if you support lowering the speed limit to 55 MPH, and that law change does not pass, are you required, by duty and honor, to drive no faster than 55 MPH??
Chas, Those that choose to believe Tiahrt kept his word will argue semantics all day long. He tried, he really tried and it was the Democrats who wouldn’t go along. It was those Democrats who were removed in great enough numbers to put the Republicans in the majority who were at fault. Kinda like they are at fault when they have the majority too. IOKIYAR!
A word that is much over used on this blog certainly applies here — he is a hypocrite! And maybe we should treat him like any other who has the illness of addiction. He has an addiction to incumbency.
SIGNATORIES TO THE 1994 REPUBLICAN CONTRACT WITH AMERICA
Pat Roberts, Kansas, 1 (elected)
Jan Meyers, Kansas, 3 (elected)
Todd Tiahrt, Kansas, 4 (elected)
REPUBLICAN NON-SIGNATORIES SERVING IN 104th Congress
Sam Brownback of Kansas
http://www.lib.umich.edu/govdocs/text/cwasign.txt
http://ontheissues.org/House/Todd_Tiahrt_Government_Reform.htm
“Again, if you support lowering the speed limit to 55 MPH, and that law change does not pass, are you required, by duty and honor, to drive no faster than 55 MPH??”
Econ101 ignores the issue of integrity. If my personal belief is that there should be term limits, then I should stand for what I believe in.
Abortion is legal, but does that mean my wife should get one?
Onemore time Econ >>>
The Contract with America was NOT a piece of Legislation, if you will only read the document… It was a PLEDGE by Republican members of Congress to Listen to the People…
Term Limits was a very popular concept… The People were talking about it… The Republican Congress signed a “Pledge” to do those things… It was NOT voted on by anybody!!
The Term Limits “bill” was not a bill, since it would have had to be a Constitutional Amendment… The Supreme Court ruled against such laws that had been enacted by 14 States, as being UNConstitutional… The Court, I believe(?), had a majority of Republican appointees…
WHY didnt Democrats vote on the Contract With America??? Because it wasnt their “Pledge” to vote on… Again, it wasnt a piece of Legislation…
So, your point about a 55 MPH speed limit is ummmm somewhat bogus… They Pledged to the IDEA of term limits… They CHOSE to ignore their own Pledge… IF they would have wanted to truly support their Pledge, they would have all ceased to run for re-election at the end of their self imposed term limits…
Linda
Term limits would require a Constitutional Amendment.
Only 30 Republicans voted against such an Amendment.
Nearly all of the Democrats voted against it.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Term_limits_in_the_United_States
http://www.mcphee.com/items/11771.html
frued lollipops
http://www.mcphee.com/items/11768.html
Chas
BULL
You are wrong.
The “Conract with America” was a Pledge to bring EACH of the “Contract” items up for a vote.
Each item WAS voted upon.
The Contract was NOT a personal pledge.
Chas., “The Term Limits “bill” was not a bill, since it would have had to be a Constitutional Amendment… ”
So who has to vote on a proposed Constitutional Amendment? Congress right?
Chas
You dont know what you are talking about.
It is entirely possible, in fact, it is necessary, that a Constitutional Amendment be presented as Legislation.
Sure, it is of a higher legal authority, if it prevails, but, to say an “Amendment” Bill is NOT “legislation” is just stupid.
Also, the Supreme Court said that individual states could NOT limit their individual members. The Supreme Court did NOT say that a Congressional Amendment would NOT be “Constitutional” (In fact, SCOTUS has no such authority to rule on the legality of an Amendment. If it passes, it would, by definition, be “legal”)
I would be willing to bet that since Tiahrt was first elected I have seen him in White’s IGA in his home town of Goddard more than anywhere else.
I’ve seen him at fund raisers, his office in DC, various community events and other political functions. My longest conversations with him or his wife have been in the grocerie store or cafe in Goddard, Hometown Kansas!
“The Contract was NOT a personal pledge.”
Wow! What other kind of pledge would you sign if it were not personal?
Guess maybe your guy is a flip-flopper on the issues?
Glickman had evolved to the point that he was representing DC to Kansans. I can assure you that Tiahrt still goes to Washington to represent us.
So who has to vote on a proposed Constitutional Amendment? Congress right?
Article V of the Constitution provides two processes by which amendments can be proposed and approved
Congress proposes amendments.
As is the case with the flag burning amendment, both houses of Congress approve by two-thirds votes a resolution calling for the amendment. The resolution does not require the president’s signature. To become effective, the proposed amendment must then be “ratified” or approved by the legislatures of three-fourths of the states. Congress typically places a time limit of seven years for ratification by the states.
The states propose amendments.
The legislatures of two-thirds of the states vote to call for a convention at which constitutional amendments can be proposed. Amendments proposed by the convention would again require ratification by the legislatures of three-fourths of the states.
What other kind of pledge would you sign if it were not personal?
The way I read the contract it was a pledge to get a first-ever vote on term limits to replace career politicians with citizen legislators.
“With the Republicans holding 230 seats in the House, three versions of the amendment got well under 200 votes, while the 12 year term-limits which overrode all the more stringent state measures managed a bare majority in the House of 227-204,[17] well short of the requisite two-thirds majority (290 votes) required to pass a constitutional amendment.”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Term_limits_in_the_United_States
Paul, you should really tell the WHOLE story when you post a link like that… Because it is pretty obvious that there wasnt enough support… because the LIMITS introduced were not seen as being terribly effective, as mentioned in the article you linked…
:roll:
The Contract was a promise to vote on each of the items listed.
Read it, MORONS!:
“Proponents say the Contract was revolutionary in its commitment to offering specific legislation for a vote, describing in detail the precise plan of the Congressional Representatives, and marked the first time since 1918 that a Congressional election had been run broadly on a national level.”
The Contract was a promise to bring these items up for a vote. That promise was kept!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contract_with_America
Hud, I believe you are correct in your assessment… :-)
Back to the post
Hillary is toast!
Chas
Republicans promised a VOTE, something the corrupt Democrats always avoided, at the time.
Democrats NEVER even considered taking a vote on measures they did not like.
The Contract was a promise to vote on these issues.
That promise was kept.
Also, it was the Supreme Court that invalidated State Imposed Term Limits.
You, Chas, are logic challenged!
—–
OK
Lets try a little exercise:
If YOU want to promise someone that you will bring an issue up for a vote, and you want to make clear that you can not, on your own, “guarantee” passage of that idea, how would you go about it?
What should the “Contract” have said? They clearly promised to bring these issues up for a VOTE and, clearly, they DID vote on these issues.
Chas, you are just impossible to argue with.
The Democrat Platform for instance, is radically pro abortion.
However, there are well over 30 members of the US Congress who are “pro life” —
No Republican promised any more than that they would support an open floor vote on each of these measures.
Period!
The Contract was a promise to vote on each of the items listed.
I guess you vote on things you don’t really believe in would have to be the answer Econ is seeking.
There are well over 30 DEMOCRAT members of Congress who are “pro life” — in other words, the Democrat Platform does not guarantee that all members of the Party agree with every issue supported by the Party.
Mr Rosell it little surprises me that a mans word means nothing to you.
Or to Toad Tiahrt.
“I can assure you that Tiahrt still goes to Washington to represent us.”
Hank means him, his wife, and other such folks of money.
Back to the post
Hillary is toast!
That may be, but her spending money on the campaign isn’t going to be the reason for it. Rather it would depend on her appeal to voters. Would you decide to not vote for someone because they are out of money?
Contract with America — only have to vote on each item. Nothing needs to mean anything after that.
First 100 hours — more than just bringing the items up for a vote is necessary.
Seems the bar is set differently. Oh I forgot — IOKIYAR
They are all politicians. They all make promises in order to be elected. They know WE THE PEOPLE aren’t paying enough attention, in fact they count on it!
And there are some who will remain partisan and support whatever the members of their party do. No reasoning with those folks. They are possessed of their “rightness.”
Incognito
When a Democrat votes for a tax increase, and that tax increase fails, should that Democrat pay taxes based on the actual, legal rates, or the higher rates that would have taken effect, should his tax increase legislation ever become law?
This is stupid.
Nobody but a RADICAL Democrat activist would support the idea that Tiahrt promised self-imposed term limits.
You are a radical kook if you think Tiahrt promised anything more than a vote on the issue.
Tiahrt kept his promise.
In fact, Chas, Congress voted on several different term limit ideas.
Nearly all of the Democrats voted against it.
Hey wait a minute! Is Econ trying to redirect the focus?
Linda
The Contract promised a vote on each of the items.
Congress VOTED on each of the items.
Tiahrt kept his promise.
Period.
Ya lost this fight and ran screaming like a little girt away from it more than a year ago paulie.
Maybe I should get a link to show just how pathetic you can be.
The comparisons Econ is providing; 55 MPH, and taxes, are not really matters of personal belief are they?
Here is a real opportunity for Todd Tiahrt to stand up for what he believes in.
Well incognito
What we are dealing in here is issues of character.
Toad and paulie have pretty much established theirs.
JR
I never lost this fight.
Tiahrt, also, NEVER lost this fight.
A bunch of idiots and biased left wing kooks disagree with me?
So what.
You are still wrong.
The VOTERS know what Tiahrt promised.
No Democrat with any brains will ever claim that Tiahrt promised self-imposed term limits, when they run against Tiahrt.
Candidates use their real names, and have to face the voters and use FACTS.
Idiots on this Blog can afford to be wrong, obviously.
You are wrong all the time, JR, and it never stops you.
Thruth is not subject to majority rule.
The truth is, Tiahrt kept his promises, made under the Contract.
Even if EVERYONE disagreed with me on that one, it would STILL be true.
But— the public does not disagree with me, or Tiahrt would not keep getting re-elected, would he?
I wonder why the republican contract with America wasn’t brought back up under Bush – when the republicans had full control?
Show me what Tiahrt PROMISED!
Show me the words, would you?
You can’t, because the only pledge was a pledge to vote on the issues.
Democrats never allowed votes on things they did not like, prior to Tiahrt’s election.
The Contract was a great idea because it was a promise of an up or down vote.
incognito
UM, read the Constitution!
Presidents have NOTHING to do with Constitutional Amendments, so why would Bush be involved in the Term Limit issue?
The contract had already accomplished its goal. The Republicans became the majority in Congress. That’s all they wanted. Go figure? Politicians wanting to be elected and doing what it takes to accomplish that.
But— the public does not disagree with me, or Tiahrt would not keep getting re-elected, would he?
I am not disagreeing with the promise to vote.
Not at all.
Where we are having a misunderstanding is that I believe the contract represented Tiahrt’s position and beliefs. It would be expected that he would continue to promote those beliefs.
Tiahrt, by running again, demostrates a lack of commitment to those personal beliefs.
Wishy-washy at best. Deceptive at its worst.
“The VOTERS know what Tiahrt promised.’
Are you KIDDING me?
I heard some of the version of Kansas voters on the radio this morning.
Some of them though George Washington fought in World War II alongside Armstrong Custer!
The voters only know what they SEE the most.
And you said it yourself “Money is speech”
By the way? I’d like to explore that. See? I don’t remember that from civics. And my kid will be taking civics soon. I want to make sure he gets it right.
Now, when I introduce my son to say….Hank, should I say to him: This man’s voice and what he has to say is more important than anything you might want to say. He has more money than you.
Do we need to remodel our school curricular to accommodate Republicans?
I was just wondering.
If you promise to bring something to a Vote that you have a pretty good hunch wont ever pass, then is that integrity?? Or is it expediency??
incognito UM, read the Constitution!
Presidents
I believe if you look above, I posted the applicable portion of the constitution.
What my focus on was the time period under Bush when republicans controlled the legislative and executive branches of government. I don’t think I said anything about the president voting, did I?
When it comes to term limits for congressional offices, it seems to me we are still living in the age of Jacksonian “pay off” mentality… You get nominated for Congessional office, and you get the “perks” LOL Still with us!! And still pretty much corrupt…
Hang on Econ — You say here >>>
“Presidents have NOTHING to do with Constitutional Amendments, so why would Bush be involved in the Term Limit issue?”
Well, if thats the case, why is Bush so adamant about banning gay marriage by a Constitutional Amendment??? Oh, wait, he gets to be supportive or non-supportive depending on how he feels on the suject of the amendment, right??
C’mon, There is no Presidential VETO on a Constitutional Amendment… But involvement??
Of course they are going to get involved!! Maybe even PROPOSE such an amendment…
Personally, I do believe Tiahrt fulfilled his promise. Republicans then blamed the democrats for not jumping on board. Rightfully so – if you believe in the promises of the Contract with America. But they had no excuse to not complete action when they controlled both houses of congress and the white house. Big disappointment. And now some want to “forget about it” and the many promises the contract included:
On the first day of the 104th Congress, the new Republican majority will immediately pass the following major reforms, aimed at restoring the faith and trust of the American people in their government:
FIRST, require all laws that apply to the rest of the country also apply equally to the Congress;
SECOND, select a major, independent auditing firm to conduct a comprehensive audit of Congress for waste, fraud or abuse;
THIRD, cut the number of House committees, and cut committee staff by one-third;
FOURTH, limit the terms of all committee chairs;
FIFTH, ban the casting of proxy votes in committee;
SIXTH, require committee meetings to be open to the public;
SEVENTH, require a three-fifths majority vote to pass a tax increase;
EIGHTH, guarantee an honest accounting of our Federal Budget by implementing zero base-line budgeting.
Thereafter, within the first 100 days of the 104th Congress, we shall bring to the House Floor the following bills, each to be given full and open debate, each to be given a clear and fair vote and each to be immediately available this day for public inspection and scrutiny.
1. THE FISCAL RESPONSIBILITY ACT: A balanced budget/tax limitation amendment and a legislative line-item veto to restore fiscal responsibility to an out- of-control Congress, requiring them to live under the same budget constraints as families and businesses. (Bill Text) (Description)
2. THE TAKING BACK OUR STREETS ACT: An anti-crime package including stronger truth-in- sentencing, “good faith” exclusionary rule exemptions, effective death penalty provisions, and cuts in social spending from this summer’s “crime” bill to fund prison construction and additional law enforcement to keep people secure in their neighborhoods and kids safe in their schools. (Bill Text) (Description)
3. THE PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY ACT: Discourage illegitimacy and teen pregnancy by prohibiting welfare to minor mothers and denying increased AFDC for additional children while on welfare, cut spending for welfare programs, and enact a tough two-years-and-out provision with work requirements to promote individual responsibility. (Bill Text) (Description)
4. THE FAMILY REINFORCEMENT ACT: Child support enforcement, tax incentives for adoption, strengthening rights of parents in their children’s education, stronger child pornography laws, and an elderly dependent care tax credit to reinforce the central role of families in American society. (Bill Text) (Description)
5. THE AMERICAN DREAM RESTORATION ACT: A S500 per child tax credit, begin repeal of the marriage tax penalty, and creation of American Dream Savings Accounts to provide middle class tax relief. (Bill Text) (Description)
6. THE NATIONAL SECURITY RESTORATION ACT: No U.S. troops under U.N. command and restoration of the essential parts of our national security funding to strengthen our national defense and maintain our credibility around the world. (Bill Text) (Description)
7. THE SENIOR CITIZENS FAIRNESS ACT: Raise the Social Security earnings limit which currently forces seniors out of the work force, repeal the 1993 tax hikes on Social Security benefits and provide tax incentives for private long-term care insurance to let Older Americans keep more of what they have earned over the years. (Bill Text) (Description)
8. THE JOB CREATION AND WAGE ENHANCEMENT ACT: Small business incentives, capital gains cut and indexation, neutral cost recovery, risk assessment/cost-benefit analysis, strengthening the Regulatory Flexibility Act and unfunded mandate reform to create jobs and raise worker wages. (Bill Text) (Description)
9. THE COMMON SENSE LEGAL REFORM ACT: “Loser pays” laws, reasonable limits on punitive damages and reform of product liability laws to stem the endless tide of litigation. (Bill Text) (Description)
10. THE CITIZEN LEGISLATURE ACT: A first-ever vote on term limits to replace career politicians with citizen legislators. (Description)
Further, we will instruct the House Budget Committee to report to the floor and we will work to enact additional budget savings, beyond the budget cuts specifically included in the legislation described above, to ensure that the Federal budget deficit will be less than it would have been without the enactment of these bills.
Respecting the judgment of our fellow citizens as we seek their mandate for reform, we hereby pledge our names to this Contract with America.
Chas
Actually, the “Gay Marriage” Constitutional Amendment issue is rather humorous.
Bill Clinton signed DOMA or the Defense of Marriage Act.
Not sure why a Constitutional Amendment is needed, after DOMA, are you?
Maybe Congress could tell the Courts that DOMA was not under their jurisdiction, but — The Courts probably would not overturn DOMA, even without such a jurisdiction clause.
I can only guess that republicans no longer feel a need to:
“Respecting the judgment of our fellow citizens as we seek their mandate for reform,”
nor to live by their WORD.
Might be humorous, but BUSH likes it!! :roll:
I found this one interesting: (Contract)
“5. THE AMERICAN DREAM RESTORATION ACT: A S500 per child tax credit, begin repeal of the marriage tax penalty, and creation of American Dream Savings Accounts to provide middle class tax relief.”
Tax Credit for each Child… Hmmmm Havent the Right Wingers been castigating Hillary for something VERY similar to this???
Further, I personally was on the fence on the term limit issue. But there was much within the Contract I did support – which provided me hope in seeing the “changes” made.
Term limits might hurt a small state like Kansas. We have limited power in the federal government. As congress uses senority to make appointments to important committees – people like the Bob Doles could advance to prominence and power. So without reforms in how congress appoints committees, chairs, and procedures, along with term limits, I worried about the impact for our small state.
Additionally, continuity in government is important. W we don’t turn over the entire congress each election period for this reason.
There is something to be said for having experienced legislatures – it takes a pretty long learning curve to get things acocmplished, and learn all the problems of your home constituents.
On the other hand, the power, the brokered deals, and the zest for retaining power – must take a lot of resources. Instead, it might be better to have an elected official know he/she only has two or three terms – to accomplish their goals. The congressional rules might change in a positive way. The people would see “change” faster?
And again, with fresh ideas, and new thinking heads, we might see more “change”?
And think of the party scramble EVERY election period to have to worry about having or keeping a party majority. Maybe a good or bad thing.
I see merit on both side of the idea of term limits.
Tax Credit for each Child… Hmmmm Havent the Right Wingers been castigating Hillary for something VERY similar to this???
Actually, this part of the promise was fulfilled.
You don’t have any children?
Thinking back to George Washington, he certainly was under no mandate to serve only two terms as President, since there was no law demanding it. BUT, he chose to live out his personal commitment to no more than two terms… An idea held by MANY of the Framers, and beyond!
I still believe if those Republicans in 1995, would have been FAITHFUL to their commitments outlined in their “Contract” they would have ALL refused to run for terms beyond what THEY themselves had proposed!!
And Econ, dont use the 55 mph speed limit anymore… that was sort of silly anyway!!
Talk on MERITS and COMMITMENT…
BTW, IIRC, many Democrats – at least the ones I knew – didnt vote for the term limits, because they saw it as a smoke screen covering bigger issues…. In other words, a legislative “trick”
Chas.
Posted February 23, 2008 at 1:07 pm | Permalink
I found this one interesting: (Contract)
“5. THE AMERICAN DREAM RESTORATION ACT: A S500 per child tax credit, begin repeal of the marriage tax penalty, and creation of American Dream Savings Accounts to provide middle class tax relief.”
Tax Credit for each Child… Hmmmm Havent the Right Wingers been castigating Hillary for something VERY similar to this???
Chas once again shows his total lack of knowledge thrown out for all to see.
Incog — IF it was fulfilled, then WHY all of the castigation of Hillary by the Right Wing when she put out nearly the same concept recently?? Just because they could holler?? Or what?? (I am not necessarily a Hillary fan)
An idea held by MANY of the Framers, and beyond!
Well not exactly. FDR ring any bells?
And then came a constitutional amendment.
Hillary needs to be castigated for breathing the same air as humans.
WHY all of the castigation of Hillary by the Right Wing when she put out nearly the same concept recently
Chas I don’t think she proposed the same thing first off. I believe she was talking about college savings accounts for every child. An automatic new entitlement, as opposed to tax credits for taxpayers who pay income taxes.
It may be viewed as an election year gimmic on her part to entice voters.
Or it may be, that both parties realize, and the democrats have now championed – the federal debit and deficit spending. There is no new money to support her entitlement program.
But I don’t know for sure.
OK
I wonder why there is no Open Thread for today??
We lost our weekend privileges for an open thread :D
Why don’t you have “veteran” plates on your car, Regular?
Why should I have Veteran plates?
I know I’m a Veteran and my DD214s say that I am. That’s all that matters. :D
Whatever . . . as the kids say.
And here I thought Regular was a flunked out PHD wannabe. Mercy sakes.
It’s starting to get personal.
I’m gone.
Obviously, :: hasnt been around here very much.
incognito – wont happen in the 104th or any other congress once everyone gets to their offices it will be politics as usual and to think that a gop congress will do those things is incredibly delusional — they’ve had the helm for about 20 of the last 30 years —– and have done pretty much nothing
Regular
Posted February 23, 2008 at 1:24 pm | Permalink
Hillary needs to be castigated for breathing the same air as humans.
Is that supposed to be funny you hypocritical moron —- no style —- no class
And Chas hasn’t said one word about the sock puppet Lib trolls popping up.
Guess he must be one of them. :D
#
irregular
Posted February 23, 2008 at 2:04 pm | Permalink
Regular
Posted February 23, 2008 at 1:24 pm | Permalink
Hillary needs to be castigated for breathing the same air as humans.
Is that supposed to be funny you hypocritical moron —- no style —- no class
——————
Blow it out your ballast tanks.
Yeah, JM, STOP IT!
There, Regular, feel better?
*****
Things that make you go “hmmm . . . ”
On Sept. 10, NEWSWEEK has learned, a group of top Pentagon officials suddenly canceled travel plans for the next morning, apparently because of security concerns.
2002 Newsweek, Inc.
They abruptly cancelled plans to fly on commercial airplanes. Ashcroft was warned not to fly commercial since July.
The rest of us schlubs just got to die . . .
Regular I hadnt seen any sock puppets yet, but I am doing other things besides the Blog… I shall keep my eyes open…. and holler when appropriate…
Chas,
You must have missed this KEY sentence to which you linked earlier, and very mistakingly thought, suppurted your point:
“A first-ever VOTE on term limits to replace career politicians with citizen legislators.”
Allow me to highlight the KEY word there:
VOTE.
Did you see that?
Let me point to it:
====> VOTE <======
Tiahrt very clearly supported voting on enacting term limits. He never signed not stated any such pledge to hold himself to term limits regardless.
JR claimed that Tiahrt signed a pledge. He admitted he lied about that. Now JR says he heard it. He has yet to back that up.
Do you have any actual proof to show that Tiahrt pledged, said, promised, or anything else that he would hold himself to term limits regardless of the vote outcome?
What is still amazing to me is that of all the issues, this is the best you liberals have to cry about.
Term limits?
The congress voted on term limits and the majority blocking them were the Democrats.
So you hold Tiahrt accountable to a pledge, he never made, to hold himself to said term limits?
I suppose it would be too much for me to think any of this is sinking in?
CapnAmerica,
Do you have a link to that NewsWeek article?
The only thing I am getting is the crack pot, tinfoil hat wearing, 9/11 conspiracy web pages when I do a search.
That couldn’t possibly be where you are quoting from could it? No… Never….
So do you have a link?
Nathan, no, not a literal statement as you describe, but an IMPLIED PLEDGE a by signature, that he SUPPORTS Term Limits… as a principle… As a CONCEPT…
Now, IF he supports the CONCEPT, they why would he not SHOW his support, by intentionally imposing what he said by way of his Pledge that he BELIEVES in, within his own life??
If you Pledge your belief in stopping abortion, and then turn around and support a family member in getting an abortion… What does that say about your Pledge to stop abortion??
To me, that is what the Republicans did with their term limits portion of the Contract with America… They Pledged their support for Term Limits… YES, they offered it up for a vote, and then when the vote didnt have enough support, they proceeded to IGNORE their support for term limits in their own careers….
It wasnt JUST Tiahrt… But, he is the one from Kansas that was being discussed…
I hope you understand that… I CAN read what the Contract says…
In fact, Nathan, I posted the link directly TO the Contract, from http://www.house.gov
Chas,
Obviously you can’t read what it says.
You posted a link to it earlier as if no vote was ever made and even offered up some stupid comparison of throwing a football.
Abortion is a matter of life and death and has an entire different level of principle behind it.
Comparing supporting term limits to abortion is absurd.
On top of that, change in Congress only comes from having enough support to get the votes to enact change.
It makes absolutley no sense to hold yourself to term limits, which the Democrats blocked, basically handing the Democrats even more seats while all the other Republicans also aimlessly quit and held themselves to term limits.
That is why it was a pledge to support term limits and bring them to a vote.
It was never a pledge to arbitrarily hold themselves to term limits.
At least you finally admit the latter.
“He admitted he lied about that.”
You are confirming that Tiahrt lied?
Because I didn’t. Toad made a pledge and he did not stick to it.
It’s OK Nathan. I’m sure it’s great to be from a family with a congressional representative in its pocket.
Now how about that civics lesson. Do I teach my son that your voice is more important than his because you have money?
JR,
You clearly said earlier the Tiahrt signed a pledge:
J R
Posted February 23, 2008 at 10:13 am | Permalink
Tiahrt signed a pledge holding himself to term limits.
Then you said:
J R
Posted February 23, 2008 at 10:48 am | Permalink
“Do you have a copy?”
No. I just took him at his given word.
So which is it JR? Did he sign a pledge to hold himself to term limits or didn’t he?
Do you have any proof besides your saying you heard him say it?
Oops I’ll re word that.
I will not teach my son that your voice is more important than his because you have money.
I will teach him that SOME people THINK their voice is more important because they have money.
And to see such people accordingly.
I don’t know if it is on paper Nathan.
It was not MY pledge.
JR,
Perhaps you should start with the basics with your son.
Like getting a job so he can afford health care and not cry and expect others to provide it to him.
That would be where I would start with your son.
JR,
If you didn’t know it was on paper, then why did you say he signed a pledge earlier?
Was that a lie or a mistake?
How about we have affordable national health care like every other western nation?
See? I fight issues that are bigger than just me and mine. That is the difference between a liberal like me and a con like you.
JR,
The side effect of teaching your son enough responsibility to get a job would also provide him with some disposable income to donate to a candidate as well.
You could also volunteer time to a candidate too. I bet if you came down to the local election office of Tiahrt and helped him campaign you would get a little bit more time to talk with him than the average person as well.
My guess is that your prevailing attitude that all Republicans are scum is easily picked up by Tiahrt and his staff and then they dismiss you as the typical left wing nitwit.
Perhaps that is your problem?
Are you saying he did not make the pledge at all?
It has been proved otherwise.
JR,
Did you ever go to that website and find out how much it would cost you a month to insure yourself?
How do you even know if you can’t afford it if you don’t try to afford it in the first place?
Nathan says >>>
“That is why it was a pledge to support term limits and bring them to a vote. It was never a pledge to arbitrarily hold themselves to term limits.”
Well, you hit the nail on the head… And you point out my exact reason for what I said earlier… IT WAS A PLEDGE TO SUPPORT TERM LIMITS, and bring them to a vote.
My point being, that IF you support something, you should be willing to stay with that support, whether it passes a VOTE of the entire Congress or not… In other words, they could make their point, as did George Washington, by EXAMPLE… not be edict!!
By the way, I guess we will have to just disagree on the abortion issue… Because if you are pledged to STOP abortion, and then turn around and help/support a family member in GETTING the abortion, that speaks mountains about your commitment to stopping abortion…
I will stand oh my belief that the pledge to support term limits could best be served by imposing those limits on one’s own congressional career, rather than continuing as if nothing had been pledged before.
JR,
Tiahrt made a pledge to vote for term limits, which he did.
Where has it been proved otherwise?
“My guess is that your prevailing attitude that all Republicans are scum ”
True. And probably as good a place as any to leave it.
Chas,
Don’t you find it the least bit odd that all the most left wind liberals here are crying about Tiahrt not imposing term limits on himself?
Seriously. Do you support term limits Chas?
JR,
Why on earth would you expect anyone to give you the time of day if you think they are scum?
I wouldn’t, at least not anymore than I do arguing with you at my pleasure.
Oh yea, BTW, I dont see this as a left vs. right issue… or a con vs. lib issue… I see this as purely a political, and governmental issue… It has an affirmative, and a negative side… So, please dont try to make it a personal, or partisan issue… OK?? Thanks!!
I cite this thread as evidence we need Senator Clinton as our nominee and NOT the panderer Obama.
Republicans cannot be worked with. Ya gotta beat them into submission.
Perhaps all of us can come together (sorry “J R” and “ksfarmgrrl,” I can’t help it) and agree to the universal truth:
GOOD POLICY = BAD POLITICS.
GOOD POLITICS = BAD POLICY.
Perhaps there’s a parallel universe where the 2008 election would come down to Ron Paul v. Dennis Kucinich. On that parallel earth, there’ll probably be some progress.
I have not donated one dime to any campaign.
I have however served in many volunteer functions for Tiahrt, I have volunteered on many campaigns here in Kansas. I am active in politics and go to meetings.
That is why I have a bit more of a voice. It is because I spend time and energy helping them.
Other than time, it cost me nothing.
You could teach your son that.
I do feel sorry for your son though JR. It sounds like you are raising him to be the perfect liberal victim.
Do you teach him that he will never accomplish anything and wont have anything without the government giving it to him? Because if that is the attitude you have towards him, I wouldn’t expect much more from him either.
Chas,
So answer the question.
Do you support term limits?
If you do, then did you get upset with the Democrats who blocked the vote on them?
What have you done, as a Democrat, to let those Democrats now how displeased you were with their vote against term limits?
Why would I find that odd, Nathan?? The Republican Contract with America proposed setting Term Limits… One of Wichita’s own signed the Contract, along with nearly all, if not all, of his fellow Republican Congressional members….
And then, he, like MANY others, ignores what they supported when it came time for them to leave, in terms of what they CLAIM to have supported!!
And yes, Nathan, I support Term Limits… Personally, I have always felt that Roosevelt should not have been elected FOUR times… too much of a chance at setting up a dynasty… as was said by MANY of the Framers…
And, as I said before, I support Term Limits, not as a Democrat, or a Republican, but in terms of governmental and political theory… I truly do not see this issue as if it should be a Partisan type of issue… It is what is best for the Nation… again, as said by Washington, and Jefferson, and Franklin, et al….
“Nathan” –
How ’bout you teach your son what Tiahrt taught his?
You know, ropes and knots.
MonkeyHawk,
You get the biggest blog ass award for that one.
I turly hope the rest of your liberal pals don’t give you a pass on such a despicable thing to say.
MH – while I don’t particularly like Tiahrt your comment is uncalled for.
Chas,
Once again, you obviously have not read anything.
They never promised to set term limits. They promised to bring term limits to a vote.
What part of that do you not understand?
They brought term limts to a vote and the Democrats blocked it.
They didn’t ignore anything.
Why not?
Nathan doesn’t hold back. None of them do. Good one Monkeyhawk.
Nathan said >>>
“So answer the question.
Do you support term limits?”
So, Nathan do you NAG much??? Give a person a chance to answer your question…. geez… Some people have other things to do besides Blog… Ok???
Thank you Ben.
JR,
I have never said such a low thing about another person as to make fun of such a tragic event in their life.
I hope the rest of the liberals don’t give you a pass either.
You get to join WS Clark and Monkeyhawk in having little to no character.
God help your son JR. Since you don’t believe in God, I hope someone helps you son.
Nathan… try to follow me here…. Would YOU support a concept for VOTE with which you disagree???
Try that one, and then I will go on….
Monkey — I gotta be with Ben on that… I am sure that Mr/Mrs “T” will have that incident on their minds for MANY years to come… eh??
Now, that being said, I DO understand Monkey’s frustration with Tiahrt….
I can assure you that Tiahrt still goes to Washington to represent us.
I’ll believe it when I see it. And I haven’t seen it yet.
JR
You are a mental lightweight — by a long shot you are the weakest poster on this Blog.
If YOU have to “beat someone into submission” with your brain? Wow, are there people out there even slower than you, mentally?
Tiahrt kept every single promise he made. Those who MAKE a promise are bound by that promise, to the people to whom the promise whas MADE!
None of you, who believe that Tiahrt should bind himself to unilateral term limits even voted for him.
Those of us who took Tiahrt up on his promise, and voted for Tiahrt, believe that Tiahrt kept his word.
Find someone out there who voted FOR Tiarht, and now thinks Tiahrt did NOT keep his word, would you?
Only such a person as that would have any standing at all, on this argument. (That person would be an idiot, but would have more right to speak than the rest of you liberals).
Simple logic: You did NOT vote for Tiahrt.
Therefore: YOU are NOT a party to the Contract!
Those who took Tiahrt up on his Contract with the voters are very very happy with him.
Chas,
I am not falling into your little trap.
I would not support something for a vote with which I did not agree.
However, before you falsely try to link the two, not holding yourself to something which didn’t pass a vote doesn’t mean you then disagree with it.
Once again, it makes absolutely no sense to hand over the Congress to the Democrats because they were the ones who blocked a term limit vote by subjecting yourself to said term limits.
I understand why you, a liberal, would want that. Of course you would want all the Republicans to hold themselves to something which would benefit you.
My question for you, is that if you are such a principled and staunch supporter of term limits, then why don’t you also cry about all the Democrats who are not subjecting themselves to term limits as well?
“I have never said such a low thing about another person”
I know better.
“You get to join WS Clark and Monkeyhawk in having little to no character.”
I consider that fine company. And your assessment of character is worth about as much to me as Toad Tiahrts word.
“JR
You are a mental lightweight — by a long shot you are the weakest poster on this Blog.”
Heh!
That explains the foaming meltdown I put you in last night paulie!
Excellent point Econ101!
Something I was thinking in my head but didn’t translate into words.
JR,
Off to work.
Like I said, I hope your son gets some ethics, morals, and principles taught to him by someone.
Because he isn’t going to be anything more than the perfect little liberal victim by the time you are done with him.
Ben
Thanks
I know we agree on little, but you do outclass many of your fellow Dems here.
He’s already a better man and person than you Nathan.
Chas you really are delusional. Hey dems when term limits come up for a vote – vote no – then the repubs that vote yes and we will have a majority and get rid of all of their senior members.
Now that a plan – for the simple minded. Guess the shoe fits.
JR you really have sank to a new low. For a person with such a ‘good’ heart you have a mouth that is out of sync. One word of advise you are raising the son who will be taking care of you in your old age. Better watch what you are doing.
“MH – while I don’t particularly like Tiahrt your comment is uncalled for.”
I completely agree. I don’t like Tiahrt mcuh at all as a politician or a congressman, but I would never joke about someone’s personal tragedy like that.
This whole thread has been scroll over territory.
Perfect post Econ. I’m sure neither JR or Chas voted for Tihart and therefore he isn’t accountable to them.
Nathan, the TWO Democrats in Congress with whom I talked about the term limits issue, and the TWO Republicans I personally talked to about the issue, ALL FOUR voted against it… NOT because of the concept…. BUT, as was pointed out in an earlier link somewhere upthread, because the 12 year limits were seen by many as being too many for the House… The Democrats were voting against the 12 year term for House members… at least the ones I had talked to… And so were the two Republicans I talked to…
There is more to this than the “simple up or down vote” that is being portrayed here…
The proposal for 12 year Senate limits, and the 6 year limit for the House, never got out of Committee to the Floor… That proposal was opposed by the Republicans in Committee…
I know, I know… it was a number crunch… BUT… I believe the four MC’s I talked to thought that if they voted in the 12 year limits, just to get it voted for, would be WAY too difficult to change once it was passed…. Therefore they voted against it!!
So, I will stand on what I said earlier… IF you pledge to something, and you CLAIM a strong belief in it, the BEST way to show your support is to act on it… whether it is voted, or not… ala George Washington, and Thomas Jefferson many years ago…
JR
Make him really proud.
GET A JOB!
Chas try for once to say ‘I was wrong’ ‘I am making myself look like an idiot’. It won’t be easy for you but you need to learn it. From your post you should be able to use it on a daily basis.
By the way who were these ‘2 dems and 2 repubs’ you talked to. You run in such an influential circle. Wish I had kept count of all of the famous and infamous people you know personally. You really should write your memoirs. I’m sure WS and JR will buy a copy.
“therefore he isn’t accountable to them”
Tiahrt told me that he considers himself to represent ALL residents of the 4th District; not only Republicans.
Hey Econ? Get a REAL job.
See if ya can’t find some second hand scruples.
Ben I know that and you know that but with the stupid argument Chas is making I was using reverse psychology on him.
By the way Ben there is a difference between representing them and being accountable to them. In my opinion he represents the views of the voters who put him in office. He does a fine job in my estimation.
The two Dems I talked to were from Nebraska… Sens. Exxon, and Kerry… One of the Republicans was a House member from Nebraska, in the district where I was located… The other was from Kansas big First District…
KsGrm, why would I admit to being wrong about something that I know I am right about… Why am I right about it?? Simple — because it is MY opinion… Since we are dealing with Opinion here… Disagreeing with you on the matter does not make ME wrong, or YOU right… It means there is a difference of opinion….
Furthermore, as I said earlier… I dont even see this as a difference in Conservative and Liberal… This is a difference in Political Opinion…
ALSO, Nathan, IF I am in FAVOR of term limits, then that means I am in FAVOR of term limits regardless of what PARTY holds the office… So, that means I am in favor of Democrats AND Republicans having term limits… as in Constitutional Amendment… I see it as being good for the NATION…. I dont believe the Constitution specifies a requirement for ANY political party….
I must amend what I said… I dont KNOW what way the Kansas Big First Rep voted on Term Limits… I know what the 3 from Nebraska voted… Sorry… I missed that above…
Sometimes you gotta mention the elephant in the living room.
Just where does Tiahrt get off preaching “family values” given his family’s track record?
When it comes to the facts of the case, it’s only RepubliCons who turn into bleeding hearts about poor Todd’s tragedy. Where was the kid’s dad when the kid slipped his head into a noose? Off being a good Republic Party congressman.
Which job was more important, Cons? To be a Republic Party water-carrier or to be a father?
KsGrm, ya know, instead of just ATTACKING… how about you try, just for once, to show me where I am WRONG??? Especially since we are discussing opinion here??? Huh???
Hmmmm given what I see upthread, I find myself wondering if M H’s nic is being “borrowed”???
That sounds totally out of character for M H…
MH – you do make a valid point about family. However I still believe your comment above was in poor taste.
Geez, KU is down by 3 to OkStU early in 2nd half… something wrong in Stillwater… Hmmmm
“You get to join WS Clark and Monkeyhawk in having little to no character.”
I have more character than you could ever HOPE to have, Price.
My whole life has been about doing for others, friends, family, children, grandchildren.
Your whole life has been about you and your guns.
And KSGrm – whether we voted for Tiahrt or not – he still represents ALL of us and therefore is accountable to ALL of us.
One of the reasons that we are in the shithole that we are right now, is that we have a president that thinks he is only accountable to Republicans.
So much for the “Uniter, not Divider” horsecrap from Bush.
Nah, “Chas.”
It’s me.
Maybe I’m particularly cranky today.
Last night on one of the other threads I lurked as “Nathan” pontificated about how his view of Christianity is the only valid one, and how “Nathan” was the only person of integrity posting to this forum. He loves dogs, you see, and will (as a good Christian) make anyone who bothers his dogs “disappear.”
But, to the credit of “Nathan,” he never specified he would shoot anyone. Just make them “disappear.”
And I’ve read most of this thread, with all the attacks against liberals which have been thinly-cloaked positions of the religious-righteous.
And I finally had enough.
Yeah, I suspect Todd Tiahrt might have suffered from his son’s suicide. But no one has looked into just how much of an ass Todd really is? Was his kid gay? Given how Tiahrt immediately and ever since has played the Sympathy Card, the question is real and relevant.
We all know that posters such as “Nathan,” or “Hank Price,” or “Econ 101,” or “American Way,” or “ksgrm,” or “Regular” et all will suck anything Tiahrt excretes.
In my opinion he represents the views of the voters who put him in office.
Well, of course, to you he does, since you were one of those who put him in office. Or I assume that’s what you meant.
But what about the other consituents in the state? What if the tide would swing on subject? Maybe those who voted for him start splitting and 51% want a change made. Would he do it, or would he stick to his guns, pleasing the 49% who agree with him?
The problem I saw and still see with Tiarht was that he didn’t bother to listen to the constituents that didn’t think the way he did. He had his mind made up, and to hell with everyone who didn’t agree.
Well, looks like KsGrm is bac to practicing her “hit and run” maneuvers again… And so it goes… LOL
Okay M H… I see it is you… And with that, I do agree!!
“So much for the “Uniter, not Divider” horsecrap from Bush”
WSC – I have never seen the Democratic Party so united. So, Bush has succeeded at least in that.
Yep…they are really united, Ben. Did you see Hillary accusing Obama of using Carl Rove tactics today? She was quoted as saying, “shame on you” to Obama.
well actually Nathan did post several months ago that he would shoot anyone that messed with his dogs —– but he had it removed when he realized how out of order he is / was —-
Taz – I am looking at the rank-and-file. The hundreds we had at Newman on caucus night during the sno storm. Clinton supporters, Obama supporters, all united in the message “kick butt in November”
This can’t be good for Hillary’s campaign. Her motorcade killed a cop on a motorcycle who was escorting her motorcade. I wonder if Hillary was the one who drove over the guy.
This can’t be good for the Mexican vote. The cop’s name was: Victor Lozada-Tiada
http://www.kansascity.com/445/story/502229.html
Death of motorcycle officer casts pall over Clinton campaign
By CHRISTY HOPPE
The Dallas Morning News
DALLAS -The energy Hillary Rodham Clinton had hoped to carry into Dallas on Friday after a widely viewed debate was instead cast under a pall after a motorcycle officer accompanying her motorcade was killed in an accident
Clinton’s entourage of about eight vehicles had maneuvered around the tragic accident that killed Victor Lozada-Tiada on her way to greet about 1,000 supporters awaiting her at a Dallas area parking lot. She took the stage before learning that the accident had been fatal.
Looks to be close to Dealy Plaza:
http://media.star-telegram.com/smedia/2008/02/22/14/cop_fatal_0223.source.prod_affiliate.58.pdf
Looking for photos.
I wonder if Hillary was wearing a pink dress.
Shame on you Max —- you find it amusing that a police officer lost his life — you have proven again what a low life you and your con friends here are …
Well Monkey man,
I think that you have crossed the line. You have absolutely no knowledge of the type of father and family man Tiahrt is. You have absolutely no understanding of what it was like for the Tiahrt family during their loss.
You now bring your insensitive liberal shit to this BLOG and cause them more pain.
You sir, had better hope we never meet. You are worse than the dog shit I scrape from my boots.
How many of you loving, liberal democrats on this BLOG are going to tolerate this crap?
“Max” (James) vile lie at 5:29 proves why it is time to take the gloves off with these people.
I was shocked initially with what ya said Monkeyhawk and a long time ago, we had a whole big “civil war” on this very issue.
Then I asked myself What if Nathan saw someone post something like about me or a Democrat? Would he be outraged? And the answer was no.
…. and you can ignore Max’x post 2
Monkey Hawk was at the accident site taking photos, and picking up the chunks.
If I was Obama, I’d stay way out of Hillary’s way.
Yeah you Libs are so sensitive.
Shocked by words on a blog, except for your own.
Gosh JR, I hadn’t noticed you still had your gloves on.
Take the gloves off then, and fight for some free healthcare for your son. You sure as hell can’t pay your own way in life posting on this blog all day.
Shame on you Max —- you find it amusing that a police officer lost his life — you have proven again what a low life you and your con friends here are –
You seem to do well enough at it James.
Posting all day EVERY day.
But then, it is ok if YOU get assistance.
Gimpy hypocrtie.
The gloves are off JR?
Is that the best you got?
Dear Editors: Please bring on the Sign-in?? Please??
Chas, if we do that, you will no longer be allowed to post as Sugar, ::, or CapnAmerica.
And if we edit every post, it will be hours before you see your post, and all of your anti-Christian crap will have to be censored out.
Welcome one and all to the Saturday Night Sock Puppet Ballet!!
Did I miss something in the Blog rules that says only One kind of religious discussion can be posted?? Must have missed that one!!
“Hank” chimes in with –
“You have absolutely no knowledge of the type of father and family man Tiahrt is.
Nope. Only with the consequences of Todd’s fatherhood.
“You have absolutely no understanding of what it was like for the Tiahrt family during their loss.
No, I don’t. But I imagine it involved a weekend of meeting with consultants about how to handle the political fall-out. Don’t you?
“You now bring your insensitive liberal shit to this BLOG and cause them more pain.
What “more pain?”
That I merely remind Tiahrt’s “family values” synchophants that Tiahrt is — by definition — the head of a highly dysfunctional family?
“You sir, had better hope we never meet. You are worse than the dog shit I scrape from my boots.”
Thanks for going on record with your threat against me. It’ll come it handy if we should meet and you live up to you machismo. (Not that I’m worried about it.)
And here’s another difference between you and me, “Hank Price.” Most people with a little common sense tend to avoid walking in dog shit.
“How many of you loving, liberal democrats on this BLOG are going to tolerate this crap?
It most certainly is not “crap,” “Hank Price.” If you walked into a room and found “Nathan” hanging by his neck from a rafter, I guess you might have some second thoughts about the value of your fatherly duties. Todd Tiahrt didn’t; he met with consultants about how he was gonna handle the kid’s suicide politically.
First thing.
Before the funeral arrangements were made. Before the body was cold.
You gotta be pretty cold to be that cold. And Todd was as cold as it gets.
Chas it isn’t an opinion when you say that Tiahrt lied. You and JR both said this. You can spin faster than anyone on here and you are still wrong when you stop.
The classless idiots on this blog that are talking about the Tiahrts loss have no redeeming qualities. Lowlifes all.
Glad to know that if we get a demo prez I and all the conservatives I can convince to back me will flood the prez office with faxes, emails, letters and phone calls letting them know that we don’t want socialized medicine. I will use JR as exhibit A as to why this isn’t a good idea. I for one don’t want to buy JR’s kid insurance. I insured my own kids with the sweat of my brow and JR can do the same when he isn’t busy piling on the Tiahrts.
Lowlifes.
Please show ANYwhere that I said Tiahrt lied?? Do you think you can handle that?? Cause it will take you a while… I never said that… Take it up with JR… I dont know if he did or not… Havent been here all day long, ya know…
“Ksgrm” –
It’s obvious you were more upset by kid Tiahrt’s suicide than Todd was.
That makes you a much better person than the congressman.
You felt real empathy. He assembled a meeting of his political consultants to contrive damage control.
Damn. And you folks call me heartless!
Monkey you are just dead wrong about that. You as usual are talking off the top of your head which is normal for you it seems.
The Tiahrts notified our church and many others as soon as their son was found. They needed the prayers of all. The pain they suffered was unimaginable for any parent to understand.
You and your ilk are disgusting. Beneath contempt. Any argument you might ever make about any subject on this blog will be dismissed right along with JR’s.
KsGrm, I still gotta think you have a reading comprehension problem, for you to make a crazy statement like accusing me of saying Tiahrt lied… Geez!!
I see all the Leftista have had their nappies and slithered on the Blog to post. :D
Chas reading your posts once is torture. Read them yourself. I can’t stomach them twice but I know what you wrote. ‘Tiahrt should resign because he said he would. Nathan reminded you he actually said it would be brought to a vote. It was. The dems voted it down.’
Chas you need a life.
Chas I have no desire to contend with your personality disorder tonight. You and :: and Sugar need to decide who is in control tonight and give us all a break.
I did NOT call for Tiahrt to resign… See, there you go again, inventing crap, and stacking it on to me!! Ma’am YOU are the one with the reading problem… You cant show anything that you claimed!! But, do try again!!
Nathan and I have a political disagreement over committment to the Contract Pledge… It isnt life or death… And I certainly did NOT call Tiahrt a liar!!
And if you are too lazy to check out the falseness of your own claim, maybe you need a “nappie” —
And for the hundredth time(at least) I am NOT sugar, and I am sure not :: so just get off you dumbness attack!!
“Ksgrm” –
The Tiahrts notified your church and many others as soon as the political damage control meeting was over.
That meeting’s first suggestion was: Notify your church.
Monkey were you in this meeting? How are you privy to something so private?
MonkeyHock coughs up more phlegm on the blog to gain Leftist Liberal Blog spew points.
O doubt he would have the courage to say these things to Congressman Tiarht’s face.
Perhaps the IRS will audit the ‘hocker’ while he’s waiting in Guantanamo. :)
“Ksgrm” –
The first rule of cross-examination is to refrain from asking questions to which you don’t want the answer.
My evidence as to Tiahrt’s political meeting before his call to your church is solid.
The kid thought he was gay. He had to deal with Todd’s political agenda.
A suicide kills two people. That’s what it’s for.
Todd, however, was a crafty enough politician to escape the noose.
A sly way of avoiding a question to which you obviously don’t know the answer. I read something to that order in a supermarket tabloid. Is that where you get your news. Maybe like KFG you get it from demoUG.
State a reputable source.
The issue of gay teen suicide is a valid one, but not in the context of Tiahrts son’s suicide. As much as I despise the Tankerless One, I would not wish that scenario on anyone.
But, the thread topic was the presidential campaign campaign…….
My question is very simple – given the abject failure of the Bush administration to garner support for their agenda, why do conservatives think that America should vote for four more years of the same?
A vote for McCain is a vote for Bush III – the Jowly One has yet to offer any difference between himself and George.
Both Barack and Hillary have offered a change (an overworked word, but accurate.) McCain is basing his campaign on FOUR MORE YEARS.
So, given the basement dwelling approval ratings of George WMD Bush, how do the Republicans plan to win?
“Ksgrm” –
You never seem to worry about “a rputable source” when you’re attacking. Why bother now.
And the fact is, being in the room where it happened probably wouldn’t work for you, now would it?
I know people who were there; people who held on to the truth against Tiahrt’s spins for a long time until they couldn’t take it anymore.
They’re still at work on Capital Hill, working for other Republic Party representatives. But the Tiahrt kid’s suicide turned them off of Todd’s self-righteous political persona.
And, ya know? It’s not all that uncommon on either side of the aisle. The people we come to believe in, work for, contribut to, and vote for often turn into the same kinds of assholes we hated in high school student council elections, and frat house votes for chapter presidents, and officers of the PTA.
And that may just be the consequences of democracy.
On one level, there’s nothing wrong at all for an abitious politician to consult with political advisors about the consequences of his kid committing suicide. On that level, it’s a rational reaction of someone whose career is on the up and whose kid is maybe a screw-up. I dunno.
But when the Congressman presents his moral standards as the only standards of anyone and everyone in America, those standards are due public consideration and debate.
Don’t worry ksgm, these are the same people that stand on the bodies of dead soldiers to make political points.
It’s why you’ll never seen any of the Leftist Libs in organizations like VFW, Patriot Guard or any other organization that gives respect to human life.
To Leftist Libs, the idea in their spongy brains is scoring political points at any cost.
Remember what I said about Left Libs, it’s a pattern.
Persecutor, Accuser, Victim.
The Leftist Lib will pivot on a pin head between these modes.
WS I think I have stated many times on here that I have no reason to support any man or woman running for prez. I don’t see that changing much in the future.
Monkey on one level I will say you are right. Power does corrupt. That said I still say that the Tiahrt family doesn’t deserve what has been said about them here tonight.
We are bloggers and he is a politician. I have a private life as I hope you do also. I can’t be defined by something I might say here. I don’t make personal attacks with concrete statements unless I give a source. I do talk about Chas frequently because he is just an idiot and I could source that with various posts of his but will say it is my opinion.
You crossed the line tonight and need to rethink what it was you intended to do with that statement. Whatever it was it didn’t work.
“WS I think I have stated many times on here that I have no reason to support any man or woman running for prez”
Weeeeeeellllllllllllllllllllllllllllll………….
What are you going do come November – vote Nader?
He’s neither man nor woman.
Looks like the elephant in the living room just broke the couch. Lousy couch.
“WSClark” offers –
“The issue of gay teen suicide is a valid one, but not in the context of Tiahrts son’s suicide.”
And why not?
Had not Todd Tiahrt’s political career depended in some part upon gay-baiting would the kid have hanged himself?
“As much as I despise the Tankerless One, I would not wish that scenario on anyone.”
Nor would I.
But as much as I “would not wish that scenario,” it’s disingenuous to think “that scenario” didn’t occur in the Tiahrt household (and, which is most significatnt, Todd Tiahrt’s political career) as a direct consequence of Todd Tiahrt’s political career.
You reap what you sow. And Todd Tiahrt sowed plenty of anti-gay seed.
Sorry to bring that up, but it’s the truth.
Todd knew the truth. His kid knew the truth. You know the truth. My only sin is to have mentioned the truth.
Nader would probably be as good a choice as any running. I can see major weaknesses with each candidate. Obama is certainly the most likable and would be the least painful to listen to for 4 years but he is really an innocent when it comes to the business of government. McCain is to prone to try to placate the wrong people. He just wants to be liked. Hillary who might or might not play into the general is just abrasive. She turns off many in her own party.
Not a good spot to be in.
Monkey you still have given no source for what you are saying. To say something like this about a family is unconsionable. Having raised hormonal teenagers, three of them, I know there are many highs and lows in their lives. Suicide is a major problem with this age group. My daughter-in-law works in mental health in Wichita. Last year was a banner year for suicides.
You don’t have the right or authority to state this as fact.
MonkeyHock’s only sin is not telling the truth, it’s being an unrepentant dirt clod.
It’s analogous to calling someone with no legs a useless cripple just so you can gain some sort of ideological or political advantage.
People like MonkeyHock are nothing but a decaying collection of skin and bones with rotting juices flowing around inside them.
They are already dead, but just don’t know it yet.
“Ksgrm” –
“Monkey you still have given no source for what you are saying.”
I guess you’d have to have been there.
I was.
Wow you ARE one presumptive bitch aren’t you ksgrm?
“I for one don’t want to buy JR’s kid insurance.”
I don’t advocate solely on my own behalf. I was for national health insurance when I still HAD insurance.
And not that I give a damn about the opinion of dried up old bean counter like you, but you don’t seem to have much weighed in when the most despicable things have been posted here about me.
And the list of offenders includes those posting when I seconded what Monkeyhawk said.
“Lady” and I use the term loosely? I KNOW you and yours don’t give a DAMN about anyone but you’re greedy sorry selves. Don’t pretend that your “righteous indignation” with what I post suddenly lowered me below the nose you look down.
“I insured my own kids with the sweat of my brow”
No baby. The poor people who have to work for you insured your kids. Without them you are nothing. And it is about time people like you started realizing it.
“Nader would probably be as good a choice as any running.”
I saw Nader speak at Oakland University in 1971 – he was an idiot then and he is an idiot now. He hasn’t the SLIGHTEST idea of how to run the country – none whatsoever.
McCain thinks that this is 2001 and he can campaign as Three – that isn’t going to work and it should be VERY interesting to see how he tries to distance himself from the Decider once the general election campaign begins.
Both Barack and Hillary are head and shoulders above McCain. The Jowly One is just this years sacrificial lamb – a shorter, bald version of Bob Dole.
Barack is the real deal – a politician that brings hope and a desire for REAL change, which is why Hillary is doing so poorly.
McCain is a joke – a caricature of an old, fat white guy running for president.
It seems boys and girls you do not post in a responsible manner. Because you were bad, the teacher has not presented us all with an open thread.
Shame on you. You should all stay after school and write one hundred times on the chalk board:
“I will post nicely like Kitrell.”
“I will post nicely like Kitrell.”
“I will post nicely like Kitrell.”
“I will post nicely like Kitrell.”
“I will post nicely like Kitrell.”
“I will post nicely like Kitrell.”
“I will post nicely like Kitrell.”
“I will post nicely like Kitrell.”
“I will post nicely like Kitrell.”
“I will post nicely like Kitrell.”
“I will post nicely like Kitrell.”
Do ya see on this thread why Obama is NOT the guy WS?
These people don’t do diplomacy. If you aren’t figuring that out I don’t know what to tell you.
“My whole life has been about doing for others, friends, family, children, grandchildren.”
And until 18 months ago, that included providing drugs at an economical price. Most notably, WSClark was a weed man.
Hey grm?
I notice you have this compulsion lately to bag and nag on other posters. Elsewhere it’s chas, here you picked me.
Why don’t you work on our resident nic switcher?
My, My… The Sock Puppet Ballet has now begun.. And the Ballet MC pretends to have authority over what it calls “children” Hmmmm an infatuation with children… Could be a serious flaw!!
JR, I see how yuo rail against the greed of others.
But how is it not considered greedy for you to want someone else to pay for your son’s health care?
With all the time you spend on this blog, you could be earning the money yourself to pay for insurance.
Suck it up, JR. Do what’s right for your family. Even if it’s distasteful for you, you owe it to your child.
You may choose to ignore this post because I’m not part of the daily crowd. But you know I’m right.
Dance Sock Puppets, Dance…. and Spin!!! Wheeeeeee!!!! LOL
Me and how many millions other people there James?
YOU live on the government dime. You have access to discounted food, free medical care etc.
You’ve no business judging anyone.
“It seems boys and girls you do not post in a responsible manner.”
Well, good to see you again AmWay – how is that bust going that you have planned for me? I bet the cops were REAL interested in the information that you gave them.
Loser.
I could do a dime of BC Bud and still run circle around you on any topic.
You are nothing but a wannabe, Kitrell.
“NEW ORLEANS — Hillary Rodham Clinton strongly defended her husband’s record on civil rights Saturday….
“My husband mended, so as to avoid ending, affirmative action. My husband had in his White House, Cabinet, and his administration, many of you I see here,” she said. “We know that when he was president, we had a rising tide and we lifted more people out of poverty than at any time in America’s recent history.”
Why is she defending her husband? I thought Hillary was running for President. Not her husband.
And what is this “we” business in the second paragraph.
Now who really WAS president?
Was Bill a sockpuppet for Hillary? I thought I read where Hillary attended 75 receptions (providing tea and coffee), and helped in greeting over 250 wives and dignataries of foreign states.
I didn’t know she was involved in forming legislation or working as president during that time period.
You libs must really be confused by all this. I know I am.
I am not James.
How did I guess you’d come up with some excuse to avoid facing the reality of your situation?
Like I said, you know I’m right. Now, you can either wait and hope the election in November does what you won’t do your family, or you can do like most other people do. Face the reality of your situation.
Why is it not greedy for you to want others to pay for your family’s health care? Just answer that, if you can.
“You are nothing but a wannabe, Kitrell.”
Clark, I hate to disappoint you. I admire Ammways work. He delivered a knockout blow to you the other night so I captured his Maui wowwie line.
It is important that posters realize and do not forget that you who post from a high horse, are really the dredges of society. Dopers don’t amount to much. I have much more in memory.
“These people don’t do diplomacy.”
But these folks are the dredges of Republican politics, J R, they hardly represent mainstream GOP’ers that can ACTUALLY think and come to rational conclusions.
Look at McCreepy for example – he can’t cut it as one poster, so he uses multiple nics so as to appear that there are more posters that agree with him.
Everyone sees through it, but he insists on playing the game.
In other words, he is trying to do it with smoke and mirrors – kind of like George W Bush.
I wonder if Bush shares McCreepy’s fascination with testicles?
The fact that you spend hours sitting in front of a computer instead of providing for your family: what does that say about your character, JR?
The fact that you’d rather have someone else pay for what you won’t provide your family: what does that say about your character, JR?
Am I judging you now?
“He delivered a knockout blow to you the other night”
A knockout, AmWay?
He was going to turn me into the police for having had smoked marijuana in the past?
THAT was a knockout?
Damn, what do you call the whack that Hearns laid on Duran?
It doesn’t matter: you have struck a nerve, a very tender one with J R.
What he really wants is a handout. There are millions like him. They ask what their country can do for THEM, not what they can do for their country.
To appeal to this mass of humanity, Hillary has promised billions in new entitlement programs. Handouts get votes. Obama, has some perception that if he wants to reach moderate democrats, he has to be concerned with the deficit and spending. Although he too, is liberal, his healthcare is not as provocative as Hillary’s. Obama is a realist.
Hillary is a dreamer.
Regardless, there are those who live their lives “waiting” for the next free cheese. They DEMAND it. They believe they are OWED it by this great nation.
Wanting a free ride, makes them liberal. It also labels them as takers from life. Not givers.
Well James I don’t spend near the time here that you do.
And I only use one nic. Today, my son and I happen to have the flu.
How is that meetup you were calling going James? Will your sister be there?
I am not James. Even if I was, why won’t you answer the questions I pose?
“He was going to turn me into the police”
Someone should be watching you. Particularly with grandchildren.
You posted you have grandchildren?
That means you were addicted to pot for a good long time. To be a grandfather you are probably at least
forty.
That means you smoked marijuana for many, many years. Your brain is fried, whether you know it or will admit it. The damage to your brain cells is not repairable.
You are probably forgetful at best, but you could have some very serious mental problems from your drug abuse.
You also have a higher risk of heart failure and lung diseases.
Terrible waste of a mind.
JR, too, with your contempt for wealthy people and high-earning people: if not for these folks, who will pay the taxes to pay for everything you want the government to give to you?
Are you not willing to let some be rich, even if they pay for your health care?
Or would you rather have no one be rich, just as long as you get what you want?
Which, may I ask, is the greedy position? (I should ask greediest, as both are greedy.)
“That means you were addicted to pot for a good long time.”
One, marijuana is not addictive.
Two, you have no idea how much I smoked or for how long or even if it was a continuous period.
“Someone should be watching you.”
If you’re into that kind of thing, AmWay, you might want to have a sit down with your mental health provider. That sort of thing is really sick.
Stay away from my windows, pervert.
Well you are indicting an awful lot of people there James.
Polls tell us that an overwhelming majority of Americans are in favor of national health care in some form.
I guess they just want a TASTE of the big “hand out” pie you they’ve given you these last many years.
I am not James, so framing your arguments in that context doesn’t mean anything to me.
I don’t blame you for not wanting to engage in this conversation. I can fully imagine how painful it must be for you, how full of regret you must be. I will stop asking any more questions for now.
Gentle people,
I would like to propose a solution for all of the ugliness on the BLOG.
I know a lot of the people here personally and I’ve really had no animus toward anyone until tonight.
If you would like to have a decent place for BLOGing and if you would like to find a solution (I have one to propose) please contact me by email.
Everyone that contacts me by tomorrow (Sunday) evening I will respond with my proposal.
hank@pixius.net
“it doesn’t matter”
So you just HAPPENED to show up on this blog and SUDDENLY you knew everything about J R, his son and his health care?
Just really OBSERVANT?
Or just full of SHIT?
Most likely the latter.
WSClark, I have posted here in the past. I read this site from time to time.
Why are you so huffy about this? What busines is it of yours?
“What busines is it of yours?”
Give it a rest, only in your mind are people stupid enough to buy the shit you’re selling.
Yeah it’s perfect the irony WS.
The welfare recipient James AGAINST welfare.
Maybe he would like to know a little more about me?
I had insurance coverage from the time I was born until just a few years ago. Nearly 40 years of total ignorance of just how bad things were getting.
Now, I DID get a hint once. On one of the rare occasions my son was ill and I still had insurance, I asked as I paid my $10 copay:
” How much would this cost me if I had no insurance?”
The answer was $215
And now of course, I find myself on that side of the equation.
My passion for any subject is just a little bit bigger than my own situation. It always has been. That is why I could not remain a Republican.
And with all those happy remarks ringing in my ears, I think I will go smoke a big fatty (drink a few beers) and watch Fast Times at Ridgemont Hish (the 3:10 to Yuma) while singing Purple Haze (Imagine) at the top of my lungs.
Outta here…………………………..
Have Fun Clark!!
Well that’s interesting JR. You accuse me of be yet another blogger.
BTW, watching Forest Gump tonight was enjoyable rather than listening to the paranoid rantings of the leftist Libs.
Any of you Libs that thinks their candidate is going to provide them with their cornucopia of entitlements, ie. free health care or anything else, is being played for a fool.
Those Liberal politicians are simply pandering to idiots for votes. Look what kind of money they have, they aren’t going to give it away or even risk it.
*Grin*
Ol’ Drug Addict is certainly not shy about his substance abuse.
dang librotards, take your perverted donkey show back to Tijuana. You guys would trade your dog for a vision card if they let you.
you libunreals might as well have the murderers you want to save from exucutions, perform the abortions.
Save a killer, murder a baby, should be the Dems new slogan.
Dance Puppets, Dance, and Spin!!!
Wheeeeeeeeeee!!!!!
Good night; Good luck;
And God bless; whatever
You conceive God to be!
Blessings All
{Except for the puppets… Puppets not being human, need no blessing!}
“Ol’ Drug Addict is certainly not shy about his substance abuse.”
Dave, your obsession with me and whatever I might choose to smoke is getting really creepy. You are one weird mo’ fo’.
I have noticed that you have showed up on the blog again to make your usual stupid and ill-informed comments.
When your wife left you Dave, why did she leave with the computer?
Maybe she thought your porn addiction was more important to you than relationships with REAL women and she felt sorry for you, just enabling your jones, I guess.
Of course, you are one sorry son of a bitch.
Sucks to be you, Dave.
Hey, Dave, did you get that case of trench mouth cleared up yet? I noticed that your post was a little yellowed and thought that your bad breath may have passed through cyberspace.
I have heard that your trench mouth is so bad that it could melt the internet.
Is that true, Golfie?
Maybe that is why your wife left you.
HiLARious, I tell you what.
Here’s the CONs busting their arms to pat themselves on the back that they don’t take no gov’t handouts.
In fact, not only do they NOT take gov’t handouts, they provide them to the rich.
Far from “we need the rich to pay taxes to fund our health care,” it’s actually the exact opposite: the rich use the power of gov’t to redirect wealth away from the middle class and to themselves.
True, we aren’t as rich, but there are a lot more of us. A few hundred dollars here and there times 200 million people, and you’re talking real money.
The CONs are just too f*cking stupid to see how they’re getting played for suckers. Most of them think they’re “rich” because they have a used car that’s almost paid off and a bass boat.
Pathetic.
the rich use the power of gov’t to redirect wealth away from the middle class and to themselves. CapnA
Prove it or STFUP.
The WE is getting very tired of liars.
“The WE is getting very tired of liars.”
Damn, that must make it really tough on you, McCreepy.
Ever other word you post is a big fat lie.
Of course, what would you expect from a big, fat liar?
And now, I am calling it a night.
Sleep well, McCreepy with your 3D blow up doll.
3970 American deaths in Iraq
Only thirty more before 4,000 in 5 years.
*****
Did anyone else notice that Turkey is now routinely invading Northern Iraq to attack Kurds?
Before our invasion I remember somebody saying something about that . . . yeah, who was it? . . . somebody was saying that it was very likely that this would result . . . seems like it’s on the tip of my . . . now I remember . . .
It was I who said it.
Wasn’t hard to see given the simple facts, facts which Bush had and chose to ignore.
Everything the reich-wing said was going to happen, the tons and tons of weapons of mass destruction, the free and fair democratic state that would soon flower was wrong. And everything that we “liberal leftists” said was going to happen, happened.
It wasn’t a matter of what one wanted to happen–it was a matter of seeing reality.
Sorry, Blog Editor.
I don’t respond to bs graffitti trolls. But post under a real nic, and I’ll do what I can.
OR simply read the voluminous evidence I’ve provided on this in the past.
Consider Exhibit A of the rich getting richer on the backs of middle class taxpayers–George W. Bush.
Bush bought a 2 percent stake in the failing Texas Rangers baseball team for 600,000 dollars of borrowed money.
Bush knew that all they needed was a stadium to be worth a lotta money, big money. So he set about using tax payer money to build one. Arlington voters were asked to approve a half-cent sales tax or “the Rangers would leave town.”
Sound familiar?
Using 130,000 to swing the vote in their favor, the new tax vote won.
They hit a snag though when they decided to go big: 200 acres of stadium and development. A lot of folks didn’t want to sell their land. No problemo–Bush & Co. simply had the city of Arlington seize the land by eminent domain. True, the city had to give “just compensation,” but who wants to go to court–who has the money–to fight a low bid? And who can sell their land on the free market once it’s been condemned for sale by the government?
The investors Bush assembled paid 86 million for the Rangers. They sold nine years later 250 million. The subsidy of the taxpayer purchase of the new stadium and the land (although cheaped by seizure) was 202.5 million, 38 million MORE than the profit made by the investors when they sold.
Bottom line–every dollar that Bush pocketed when he sold the Rangers came from taxpayer money. Economists who looked at this deal claim that BushCo. only appreciated the team’s value by TWO-THIRDS of what they taxpayers put into it.
This shows two things–one, how the rich use subsidizes to enrich themselves, and two, how subsidizes are inherently inefficient.
MonkeyHawk,
You truly are a despicable piece of crap. It amazes me that Ben was the only one to say anything to you and then he still halfway agreed with you later.
You liberals are sick. You will say and do anything you can to further your political gain.
There really isn’t much I can say to explain the total discontent I am feeling after reading what MonkeyHawk wrote and several of you liberals agreed with.
WS Clark,
Once again, WS Clark, when you say the mean and nasty things you do, it negates getting to say you are a man of character.
A man of character doesn’t hope someone dies soon. A man of character doesn’t make the irrational hate filled comments about others based on simple disagreement on a blog.
It must be some sick twisted liberal circle jerk you, JR, Chas, and MonkeyHawk have going on with each other.
Devastating example of how the rich “game” the system to pad their riches without using their own money.
Back to the original topic of this blog, read Frank Rich’s column in the NY Times this morning “The Audacity of Hopelessness” if you want an analysis of why Obama is better able to wage a successful campaign against McCain.
Just for a little update, I have had 10 positive responses to my request as of this morning at this time.
Most from people I know from meet ups or other friends. So far it is a pretty good representation of the BLOGers here.
I’ll email you all my plan and proposal and request input this evening. I’ll be busy to day until this evening.
Thanks for your continued support!
Hank
hank@pixius.net
Nathan: “You liberals are sick. You will say and do anything you can to further your political gain.”
You mean like this?
Max: “This can’t be good for Hillary’s campaign. Her motorcade killed a cop on a motorcycle who was escorting her motorcade. I wonder if Hillary was the one who drove over the guy.”
The over the top nastiness, which includes using tragedy against the “other side”, is coming from both sides. You Nathan, quite frankly, have been contributing to it (in fact, your rant contributes to it). So have WS Clark, JR, Monkeyhawk, Ksgrm, Econ., myself (at times, although I do try to address behavior, rather than a poster’s expressed identity), etc. (and none on this short list are the intentional trolls who intentionally and gleefully stir nastiness up). The self rightous ability of people to screen out the bad behavior on their side, or insist that it is “not as bad” (and of course, it is always the OTHERs who started it), just makes me shake my head, and reminds me why I prefer moderated boards. Quite frankly, the majority of posters here would have been kicked off long ago on a board with such moderation. Alsom elections just bring the nastiness out.
The fact is, it is human nature to see the offenses of the “other” but to ignore the offenses of those on “your side”. Note Econ’s compliment with dig here:
“Ben
“Thanks
“I know we agree on little, but you do outclass many of your fellow Dems here.”
He should have stopped at, “we agree on little” but he had to go the extra little inch, and therefore showed less class.
Bah.
Ksagnos you are right in much of what you say and I for one will make an effort to not address either Chas or JR personally.
That is wrong and doesn’t add to the discussion. The Tiahrt discussion last night was over the top and I just couldn’t let it go.
Heres to better and move informative discussions.
“A man of character doesn’t make the irrational hate filled comments about others based on simple disagreement on a blog.”
Simple disagreements? Sorry, Price but I for one will not bow to your self-proclaimed superiority.
You are the embodiment of everything that is wrong with America.
10 Trackbacks
commercial debt collection…
…
Boots Travel Insurance…
I have to say, that I could not agree with you in 100%, but it’s just my opinion, which could be wrong….
Affordable Motorcycle Insurance…
It is a quite interesting post but quite difficult to understand for me -…
Jessie…
Thanks, I recently started my own business so this type of post is of great interest to me. Keep it up :)…
Accounting A Level Distance Learning…
I enjoyed reading your blog. It is so interesting reading other peoples personal take on a subject….
Ass Thick Ass Babes Kick Ass…
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view…
brenda song pictures…
I Googled for something completely different, but found your page…and have to say thanks. nice read….
Sex Gay Sex Anime Sex…
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view…
coffee bean direct…
Sebastian Rametta is the name, coffee is the game….
card debit student…
I found your post by searching Google. Very informative. I have similar updates on my site and I hope you don’t mind if I include this in my own site….