|
Post by castanea on Nov 21, 2010 11:32:32 GMT -5
WA senators received over $225,000 from groups urging support for the bill and less than $6000 urging opposition. What an amazing coincidence that the WA senators supported the bill.
CA senators received over $280,000 from groups urging support for the bill and less than $40,000 urging opposition. What an amazing coincidence that the CA senators supported the bill.
AR senators received over $450,000 from groups urging support for the bill and less than $150,000 urging opposition. What an amazing coincidence that the AR senators supported the bill.
|
|
|
Post by atash on Nov 21, 2010 15:53:12 GMT -5
Good job, Ozarklady. Unfortunately it is difficult to get rid of entrenched incumbents.
I have a feeling that there was blatant election fraud in one of the northern states. Normally this is not necessary due to the power and influence of their political machine, but the tea partiers caught them unprepared. They were caught red-handed messing with the electronic voting system, and there were the usual statistical improbabilities with mail-in ballots. The whole cover story, complete with tales of sobbing working class women begging her not to give up, was wildly improbable.
Here in WA it is impossible to get rid of Patty Murray. First of all they sabotaged the only candidate--Clint Didier--who was a real alternative. Instead they ran Dino Rossi, whose platform was IDENTICAL to Patty Murray's on every single issue, which, of course, was the whole point. The whole point of a 2-party system is to create the illusion of choice, using the smallest number of choices possible.
(stepping on soap-box)
They tried to preserve the illusion of choice by focusing on the bogus personas of the candidates, and by spinning what little they revealed about their positions on various issues into the illusion of a difference. For example, Rossi claimed to be "personally opposed to abortion" but "has the duty of office not to impose his personal opinions on others". Ummm. OK, how is that different from Patty Murray's "good Catholic girl" weasel-words?!
My point is not whether they are pro or anti; my point is that their positions are identical, but spun as diametric opposites. The biggest issues facing the country--economic policy and foreign policy--were totally off the table!! If Rossi really wanted to win, all he would have to do is point out that Patty Murray enthusiastically spoke out in favor of and voted for wars whose popularity declined faster than TPTB were expecting, leaving her exposed to her own unpopular opinions. He could have quoted her lying about Saddam Houssein's weapons of mass destruction. BUT HE DIDN'T. He expects to be on the same payrolls she is on!
Instead the whole election was focused on personas. A "persona" is a personality that you project that is duplicitous.
Murray's persona even has a name: "Mom in Tennis Shoes". It's a lot like Joan Crawford having adopted four orphans to create the illusion of a kind-hearted loving motherly type. The moniker dates back to a fictional, misandric story she tells to create sympathy as a downtrodden woman under the brutal thumb of "the patriarchy".
Maria Cantwell is also impossible to get rid of. She is very well-financed. She would not need the bribes (though I'm sure she's happy to accept them); her social circle IS the big money that backs her up.
Cantwell's persona is very shallow: high-tech executive yuppette (actually, she has no technical expertise; it is totally a media deception). She does not bother cultivating an elaborate deception about her personal life, simply having an understanding with the media not to disclose it even as she is fairly openly "out" in public and at the pride festivals.
One of her big deceptions was claiming to be totally financing her own campaign. What she did was to "loan" herself the money, while accepting contributions to pay herself back. The real outrage though is she stiffed her own non-voluntary campaign workers while "paying herself back". The scandal was barely mentioned in the press.
(stepping off of soap box)
|
|
|
Post by castanea on Nov 21, 2010 18:29:56 GMT -5
And that' may be the major problem with our system, the illusion of choice.
Most democrats and most republicans love our industrial agricultural system. There are no significant dissenters. Despite their posturing they have similar if not identical foreign policy goals. If McCain had been elected we would have had expanded war in the Middle East. With Obama we got expanded war in the Middle East. With Bush we got bail outs and with Obama we got bail outs, etc etc ad infinitum.
|
|
|
Post by bunkie on Nov 22, 2010 12:24:27 GMT -5
you forgot McMorris atash!
and Murray was one of the few senators who voted against the Iraq war in 2002.
|
|
|
Post by castanea on Nov 23, 2010 1:18:23 GMT -5
Interesting rant: ppjg.wordpress.com/2010/11/19/reid-stalls-out-s-510-fake-food-safety-bill-until-monday-as-backroom-dirty-deals-are-struck/"In a quick announcement as the Senate convened, Harry Reid, Senate majority leader said that the vote on S.510 fake food safety bill would take place Monday evening, the 29th, at 6:30 PM, CST and that no voting would occur today. According to Reid, all the dirty deals intended to criminalize and sell out American farmers and ranchers and our food supply, were still being worked on behind closed doors, although I believe he referred to them as amendments. Reid also made some idiotic statement about how the American people were desperate to get this bill passed and that it was the first modernization of the system in 100 years. Neither statement has even a grain of truth in it. But then, Reid has shown a consistent tendency to simply say whatever he feels is necessary to promote his cause, the facts be damned. Here’s some facts for ya Harry! The American public is desperate…..but not to let you hand agriculture over to multi-national corporations or to the whims of the World Trade Organization. And, the last thing anyone in their right mind wants to see is an expansion of either the FDA or USDA. Both agencies need to be shut down as both are a threat to the viability of the nation. The American people are desperate to stop this bill dead in its tracks. That is a FACT! At this moment, the switchboards in the Senate are jammed with calls from desperate Americans wanting this bill killed. But you knew that. You knew that because the fax machines backed up and the email servers are close to crashing as desperate Americans tried to reach their Senators to tell them to vote “NO!” on S.510. Reid’s statement that this is the first modernization of the food system in 100 years was also a blatant lie. The last 100 years are littered with bill, after bill, after bill that twisted the law, and went on to create monstrous agencies such as USDA and FDA, which used the Federal Register to manipulate rules, violate rights and to assume power and authority they were never intended to have. And even with all this self granted and congressionally granted empowering, neither agency is competent or effective. Each and every one of these things breached Constitutional prohibitions and consistently violated individual and property rights. All of the unlawful and harmful entries into illegal trade agreements, which are NOT treaties, which affected our right to trade, to engage in business and regulated absolutely every corner of our economy including agriculture, revised the food regulation as part and parcel of the selling off of America. And you, and the rest of our congress and presidents from successive administrations, and multiple congresses, worked tirelessly to take every right from us that you could; to take every vestige of freedom and sovereignty from us. The public is screaming “NO!” to S.510, Mr. Reid. We know what this bill is about and it has nothing to do with the safety of our food system. You can shut down the switchboards, shut off the fax machines, and refuse to accept email and throw those hand written letters in the trash and claim you never got any of them…..but we know you did. The calls are going out in several states now to begin recall campaigns against any Senator who votes to pass this bill. Even if this cannot be accomplished, citizen grand jury’s should be convened to determine if charges of malfeasance of office, the abuse of power, and possible questions of treason would be better addressed in the courts. There is no law that says a traitorous politican can’t be held accountable."
|
|