1 Ugh.  Let it go, Miller.....

2 Murky is one lucky bitch to pull this off.  What's with Alaskans?  Joe wins once and then Murky wins?

3 and she will keep her seniority. Why? That's the part that burns.

4 Miller should have legally changed his name to Joe Millkowski.

THEN we would have a fight on our hands....

5

IMO he NEEDS to continue...

The US Constitution guarentees that each State will have a Republican form of Government... ie one where the Written rule of law is Supreme.

Its clear that the Written rule of law is on Miller's side.... and in the Alaska Supreme Courts descision it stated that (to paraphrase) in order to keep the integrity of our "Democratic" process, that the will of the voter must be sancrosanct.

The Alaska Supremes based their ruling on the idea we were a Democracy, NOT a Republic, as the Constitution Guarentees.

This is actually a very important Case, as it goes to the very heart of what our Government is.

6 Let's see, in a Red State she loses the primary, then in a three way race all these Dems decide to vote for her?

I detect phony votes

7 Murky, indeed.

8 The courts rightly decided that we need the cooperative and moderate Republicans who will help our Democrat overlords.

Oh, did I tell you for the 389th time that I'm a registered Republican?

9 Coke futures in alaska have skyrockets. Apparently dealers can now take government credit cards

10
Yes, Joe, give up and go away, please.

We don't need conservatives like you who are willing to fight. You're an embarrassment.

Maybe we'll lucky enough to woo Joe Lieberman to our side.

11 I think this sums it up perfectly.

12 Enough, Joe.

Moocowflopski won by more than10,000 votes. Does Miller believe that many had whatever errors he's whingeing about?

Voters make mistakes. Hell, 52% of voters went for Osama Obama. If the voters of Alaska wanted Miller, they would have elected him, or at least made the result close enough that reasonable doubt would apply.

I think it's pretty clear what the voters' "intent" was in this election. They didn't want Miller.

Romeo13 and all the other "you go, Joe!" commenters would be howling for him to jack it in if he were a Democrat. They just can't believe that the same state the elected the Divine Sarah would go against her wishes and elect someone she doesn't like.

It happens, though.

13 I rebuke you worms who think Miller should quit.  This is his legal recourse, and unless you have a stake in the continued trampling of election laws, your interest is zero towards him giving up. My interest is in his establishment in the courts, once and for all, what the standards are, if there are to be any. 

14 11 I think this sums it up perfectly.

Posted by: JonathanG at December 27, 2010 09:56 AM (aYOnh)

Yes, but why when I saw that poster did I suddenly think of the Joke about the Young Bull, and the Old Bull?

15 It doesn't hurt anyone, except maybe Miller himself, for this to be followed through on until the absolute last possible avenue has been explored.
At the very least, we'll find out what this Fed. Judge thinks of the State Court's  rather elastic standards.

16 Romeo13 and all the other "you go, Joe!" commenters would be howling for him to jack it in if he were a Democrat.

Posted by: MrScribbler© at December 27, 2010 10:00 AM (Ulu3i)

Uh, for the Record, I"M NOT A F"N REPUBLICAN!

I'm a Constitutional Conservative... one who thinks NEITHER party is defending the Consitution.

17 You clearly want more Al Franken, and Christine Gregoire's in our future, because
that will be the result if this ruling stays in effect, the chadification of America.

18

Many may think that Joe is fucking the chicken.  If he is, then he's fucking it good.  Go Joe.  That whole fiasco in AK smells like bad fish.

19 Join us for the Welcome Back Lisa party in the GOP Caucus Room. Starts at 8 sharp.

20 Let it go, Joe. You ran a bad campaign. The liberals and the establishment teamed up to defeat you. And Alaskans love sucking on the Federal pork teat too much.

21 Minuteman, losing an election is not the same as quitting. He can sue about it, if he wants, but word is that there aren't enough spelling errors among the write-ins to make a difference. The voters of Alaska made their preference known. He lost, so its over.

22
You know who else should shut up?

23

Miller fought it for as long as possible.

There really is nothing left for him to do at this point. He should concede.

I am as pissed as everyone else, but this race is over.

24
It's pitiful to see we have people on this blog who don't know the difference between using the courts to right an injustice and using the courts to litigate a (left-ward) social change.

25 Ïntent¨is not found in the election law, the process for casting a vote is.  And even if he lost, the process for ascertaining the correct count according to that legal is his right to equal protection.

26

let.it.go

Miller could set himself up to have a run at it in 2014 but doing this doesn't help

He must face that his imexperienced campaigning cost him in the last couple weeks after he lookes to win easily over both Murky and the Dem; by the time the media was outed for what they were doing to him and people started realizing the truth it was too little too late

let's not forget while AK is a deep red state as far as how they vote, they sure like themselves pork and Dem policies; they're kinda like WV a little mixed up in what they want and incidentlly both those states are amongst the least happiest in the nation

27 He did all he could,the people of Alaska want the scrunt.

28 I still say MooKow stole the election through cheating and the courts helped her.

He should also seek Federal redress through the Sect V of the VRA (which I consider unconstitutional). Hell, we may as well use it.

So yes, he should continue to pursue this. He has already done all the harm to his political future he can do.

And just in case nobody has said it yet. Piss on this scrunt. She now has a 100% record in the lame *uck session voting with the Dems. So all of you people who hate on the ACU ratings, even that is RINO worthy.

29 IMHO, Alaska is not the hill to die on....

Minnesota, Washington State... these were the hills that needed a surge....

30

21

Don't press your luck too much, there, Malor.

For the record, I thought this election was over once it was determined that there weren't enough contested ballots to swing the race.  There is a difference between ensuring the fairness of elections and attempting to overturn results by the courts, the latter of which Miller is clearly doing.

Joe Miller won the primary, and good for him.  But his slapdash campaign, which consisted of mostly Fox News appearances and hiding behind the skirt of Governor Palin, was one he deserved to lose.  Too bad, so sad.  And now by pursuing this frivolous challenge, he has poisoned the well against any future Senate runs by painting himself as a whiny sore loser.

31

Posted by: Ben at December 27, 2010 10:10 AM (wuv1c)

I agree, it pisses me off like Hell Murky won and won as wide as she did but we must move on; take it from someone who has to deal w/ his indy brother talking about how "creppy" Joe Miller was and how glad he is Murky won that we must move on from this and Joe should too

32 No wonder Bristol Palin bought a house in Arizona.  Get away from the mushbrains who voted Miller then changed their minds and wrote-in a hatchet-face RINO like Murkowski.  Smart move.

33
...if Miller were a Democrat, you'd be screaming bloody murder that he was trying to use the courts to overturn an election.

Gabe, you got bitchslapped two weeks ago for using this exact same lame equivocation argument on another issue.

If you were a conservative, you'd understand that is not how we operate. We fight for what's right; it has nothing to do with party labels.

34 Alaska is a paradox.Lots of rugged individualists but somehow the state is addicted to the gubmint teat.

35

Posted by: Lou at December 27, 2010 10:15 AM (IH3P2)

agreed

36

Posted by: Crusty at December 27, 2010 10:17 AM (GvSpB)

don't forget Miller BARELY won that primary, and then the very people who voted for him turned on him

we saw it in CO as well

I've seen a disturbing trend w/ SOME tea party candidates where they get in and suddenly people who voted for them turn on them in the general thinking they made a big mistake

It happened in down here in FL w/ the Governor's race and almost cost the Reps that seat

37 Soothsayer, if Miller were a Democrat, you'd be screaming bloody murder that he was trying to use the courts to overturn an election.

Posted by: Gabriel Malor at December 27, 2010 10:14 AM (nPZxi)

 

I'm saying that it's good to see a repub. throwing the legal shit that the dems have been throwing at us for so long right back at them.  Miller still has a legal recourse to take, so let him take it.  If nothing else, it may show us just how fucked up and corrupt the election process in some states has become.

38
Would anyone here support, say, Don Young if you thought he stole an election in AK?

I know I wouldn't. Republicans don't steal elections. And conservatives don't supporters cheaters.

And, conservatives don't support going to courts for 'democracy.'

39 It's the Republican leadership who allowed her to keep her position as a Republican who are at fault at this point.   She didn't run and win as a Republican, so she has absolutely no standing to caucus with them.

Throw out all the RINO's.  I'd rather have real Dems run and win then these cretins.

40 And, conservatives don't support going to courts for 'democracy.'

Posted by: Soothsayer for RNC Chair at December 27, 2010 10:22 AM (mpQs4)

No, but some of us believe we need to to support the REPUBLIC.

41 It's funny how some of you think we're ever going to get what we want by good old fashioned voting in a two-party system.

42

Posted by: Vic at December 27, 2010 10:14 AM (M9Ie6)

I agree on her lame duck voting, take it from a guy who has been called a RINO himself for defending some moderates in the party, her behavior and voting pattern lately makes Mac, Graham, and even freaking Brown look like Reagan conservatives

43 Last time, they took down a sitting Senator, with a fraudulent indictment, to replace him with a real piece of work like Begich, now they secure a spot for Lisa, who really doesn't even have her old man's conservative instincts, she's a Charlie Crist
without the tan, The judge didn't even look at the allegations of voter fraud, it was
not germane to a pre-arranged outcome.

44 Posted by: Soothsayer for RNC Chair at December 27, 2010 10:18 AM

Very noble of you.

What were you doing when people were raising the question of Osama Obama's Constitutional eligibility for the Presidency? Deriding the doubters as "birfers?"

Sorry, I'm not buying this "oh, it's all about the Constitution" argument from you or Romeo13. I think you're butt-hurt because Moocowflopski won and you don't think it's "fair" for people to elect a self-important, "entitled" pork-spreader to office.

The voters of Massachusetts did that for decades.

Keep supporting Miller if you want. But the "defending the Consituttion" justification sounds more and more hollow by the day.

45

Posted by: erp at December 27, 2010 10:22 AM (Wkm4K)

not sure I agree w/ the "purity or die!" mindset but I agree Republicans dropped the ball w/ her, they don't control the Senate so what's 1 of them being thrown out for being a sore loser gonna hurt? They should have abandoned her or demand 100% policy support for what she did

46 Good for Miller. No way in the world 100k write-ins for Mudflapski weren't part of an immense fraud. Compare the handwriting and I bet >90% were done by the same group of <100 people. Once would hope one of Leeza's flunkies that were part of the fraud would step forward and come clean but we shall see. Go Joe Go.

47 41 It's the Republican leadership who allowed her to keep her position as a Republican who are at fault at this point.   She didn't run and win as a Republican, so she has absolutely no standing to caucus with them.

Let´s add another: She doesn´t vote as a Republican.        

48

Posted by: YRM (The 2nd Youngest Ace Commenter) at December 27, 2010 10:21 AM (K2kVm)

That's not the whole story.  The sickening tale of the 2010 election was that of missed opportunities in the Senate.  The candidates we backed - Ken Buck, Sharron Angle, Christine O'Donnell, Joe Miller - we backed for terrible reasons and because certain media figures on our side conjured up phantoms of a Republican Party gone by.

These were solid conservatives who just could not stand up to media scrutiny.  They made gaffes, conducted themselves in a laughable manner, and allowed themselves to be undone by even minor things that a professional would have brushed off.  It wasn't that voters turned on them.  It's that they were crappy Senate candidates.

But we learn.  We look at a record instead of drooling over a Republican who points at whoever's leading and screams "RINO!"  We won't allow our dollars and our decisions to be dictated by the Limbaugh Rule or the Levin Rule or whatever rule that has electability as a nonfactor.  If you think electability is not a factor, you're going to love the six more years we now have of Dingy Harry.

49
I'm on record for one who has always wanted to see the birth certificate.

Not the copy of the birth cert, I want to see Obama's real birth cert.

You know why? Because Obama is legally obligated to produce it just like all the others before him.

Do I believe Obama was born in the U.S.? No.The birth cert he produced is crap with an official seal on it.

Where are Obama's other records? School records? His entire past is nonexistent.

50

Posted by: MrScribbler© at December 27, 2010 10:26 AM (Ulu3i)

said it better then I could, it's amazing the hypocrisy when the shoe's on the other foot; not right for either party to try this

Posted by: cali grump at December 27, 2010 10:28 AM (hL0k

any proof of your claims or just wishful thinking? If you have proof, this is a scandal that must be outed, no proof and it amounts to just Al Gore sore loserism

51 If only we could elect more solid, conservative folks like Scott Brown.

ooops.

52
btw, we do know that Obama spent some of his childhood in Indonesia...in a Muslim school.

And we know that all of Obama's siblings are foreigners.

So the people who are taking a big leap of faith are the ones who believe Obama was born in the U.S.

53

To YRM's point, it is interesting to see that.

I think a lot of voters were caught up in the 'anyone but establishment ' mood that they may have voted for someone they hadn't heard of simply because they hadn't heard of them

Ace made this point, that the people in public life have at least gone under and survived scrutiny, whereas some of the "tea party" candidates folded like cheap tents when their record was examined on further notice. Maes and Buck from Colorado come to mind. Same with Angle in Nevada.

I think its a better idea to really know the background of the person you're voting for rather than making a kind of last minute decision that is really just a protest vote.

People like Pat Toomey or Mike Lee were legitimate tea party-esque conservative who had public records and been subjected to media scrutiny. I'm of the opinion that we should stick to people like them rather than a johnny come lately who no one really knows and surges just prior to the primaries.

 

(I put tea party in quotes because let's be honest, a lot of opportunists jumped on the bandwagon when they saw an opportunity. What's the French expression? Resistance fighter, post war.)

54 Miller is fucking them back. Good.

55

Posted by: Lou at December 27, 2010 10:30 AM (IH3P2)

I agree w/ a lot of what you said; we'll be demonized and hated by many on this blog for it but electability is not something to scoff off, like you said Harry Reid was a great example on how an unpopular incumbent can still win no matter how tough it can be for them if there's a bad candidate on the other side, I fear this too will happen w/ Obama in 2012

56 Sorry, I'm not buying this "oh, it's all about the Constitution" argument from you or Romeo13. I think you're butt-hurt because Moocowflopski won and you don't think it's "fair" for people to elect a self-important, "entitled" pork-spreader to office.

Keep supporting Miller if you want. But the "defending the Consituttion" justification sounds more and more hollow by the day.

Posted by: MrScribbler© at December 27, 2010 10:26 AM (Ulu3i)

Well, I'm so glad its up to YOU to decide what is a valid arugument... or to speak to the motivations of someone you have never met...

Hubris much? 

I could say that you are supporting the failed Republican party, putting the "optics" of his fight, over the need to defend the Consitution... but I won't, because I don't know you or your motivations.

57 What was wrong with Ken Buck, really, except for the put up the netrroots ran against him, which was swallowed by too many here. Castle still proves he had no clue, with his most recent votes, which proves he couldn't have ever won the primary, he was prematurely on the path to Specter and Jeffords. Brown, btw
has proven himself just marginally better than  the others, with the FinReg bill, START et al.

58

If only we could elect more solid, conservative folks like Scott Brown.

ooops.

dude, its the best we are ever going to get in Massachusetts.

I'm happy to have him, no matter how much he pisses me off. I will be forever greatful that a Republican sits in Ted Kennedy's former seat. The shadenfreude just feels so good.

59 Joe Miller is trying to expand his minority base by picking up the Alex Jones, George Noory, Jesse Ventura - cover-up and conspiracy demographic

60

Do I believe Obama was born in the U.S.? No.The birth cert he produced is crap with an official seal on it.

well that eliminated his opinion's validity, Alex Jones listener huh?

61

Posted by: Ben at December 27, 2010 10:36 AM (wuv1c)

50  55

Seems we're simpatico on these points.

62 don't forget Miller BARELY won that primary, and then the very people who voted for him turned on him.

I don't see that since he won the primary with only 55K votes. He got almost 91K in the general.

The Dems put MooKow in office.

63 OT-
Question for computer people. I'm about to start using a new computer and I want to remove everything possible from this cpu as I might pass it along to someone. Suggestions on the best/most thorough way of doing this? Bing search yielded a zillion suggestions/arguments on the topic.

64

Posted by: Ben at December 27, 2010 10:38 AM (wuv1c)

you can say buh-bye to Brown in MA in 2012, the tea party express will butt-in and throw him out in the primary and the tea party candidate will lose in state that just re-elected the most unpopular Gov in the country

same will happen in Maine

65 Keep supporting Miller if you want. But the "defending the Consituttion" justification sounds more and more hollow by the day.

Posted by: MrScribbler© at December 27, 2010 10:26 AM (Ulu3i)

 

How about keeping it on a simpler level.  Like, you know, not changing election laws in the middle of an election.  Your perspective on this has been shared too long by repub candidates and it has cost us dearly in the past.  As long as there is a legal pathway yet to take, then I say Miller should take it.  All of you who think Joe should just pack it in and quit should ask youself this question:  Why is the legal pathway that he's taking there in the first place? 

66 The circular firing squad is forming.

67 Watch how I do things. The courts fear me.

68

don't forget Miller BARELY won that primary, and then the very people who voted for him turned on him.

I don't see that since he won the primary with only 55K votes. He got almost 91K in the general.

The Dems put MooKow in office.

Yeah, I'm betting that her votes were something like 60-40 Dem to Rep.

Scot McAdams was supposed to get 32% but he got like 24%. Clearly more Dems decided that Murkowski was a better alternative to Miller, and quite simply they were right. Its not like the Democrat could have gotten more pork for Alaska than Murkowski.

Miller needs to concede and prepare to run against Begich in 2014.

69 I want to remove everything possible from this cpu

Move it?  Or wipe it?  I'm assuming you mean the data on the hard drive btw.

70

Posted by: Ben at December 27, 2010 10:36 AM (wuv1c)

this analysis is spot on, Christine O'Donell was a great example of this though I won't mention anymore of that race because of the knee-jerk reactions some have to defending her no matter how factual what you say is

71 same will happen in Maine

Good thing too.  I'm definitely wasting my geld on whoever primaries the Senators from Maine, and god help me, the Senators from Tennessee as well.

72

Posted by: YRM (The 2nd Youngest Ace Commenter) at December 27, 2010 10:37 AM (K2kVm)

I'm not ready to make that judgment with regard to Obama in 2012.  For all that's been said about Sarah Palin, who I presume is the type to which you're referring, she's a known quantity.  She's not a popular person, but there's really nothing Obama or the media can say that can possibly bring her down any more.

Now, if we get charmed by some libertarian type or some Ron Paulish Freeper-rightroots successor (I'm looking directly at you, Herman Cain), all bets are off.  Failing him, we'll probably end up nominating some guy with anti-Semitic writings or who dressed in Nazi uniforms or something like that, and the usual suspects will shrug their shoulders and say, "better Obama than a RINO!"

73 If you think electability is not a factor, you're going to love the six more years we now have of Dingy Harry.

Posted by: Lou at December 27, 2010 10:30 AM (IH3P2)

Yes, your argument falls apart as soon as you put up ALL the tea party/Palin conservative candidates instead of cherry picking only the ones who lost.

74 Toby,
I think I mean Wipe it. Remove all the data.

75 65% of the electorate voted for someone other than Miller. Not everything is a conspiracy. He was just too inexperienced and conservative for the voters in that state.

76 his analysis is spot on, Christine O'Donell was a great example of this though I won't mention anymore of that race because of the knee-jerk reactions some have to defending her no matter how factual what you say is

Posted by: YRM (The 2nd Youngest Ace Commenter) at December 27, 2010 10:43 AM (K2kVm)

Too bad NOTHING factual was ever said about her.

77 Wipe Drive Professional

78 Toby, and to be more clear I don't need/want to save anything. If it all goes "poof", that would be fine.

79 I want to remove everything possible from this cpu as I might pass it along to someone.

One option that would guarantee nothing is left is to spend $40 on a new hard drive and keep or destroy the one in the computer.

80

Posted by: Lou at December 27, 2010 10:45 AM (IH3P2)

actually i'm refering to any possible unelectable candidate, Palin is in the fringe of that but she can still pull off the comeback though I still yet to think it's coming

 

Posted by: Vic at December 27, 2010 10:45 AM (M9Ie6)

the problem w/ any criticism of tea party candidates is the knee-jerk reaction that we're attacking every tea party candidate or the whole tea party as a whole. that we oppose the ideas or that we see the whole movement as extermist or radical. we're simply refering to some state-wide loses that we could have won had we nominated better

81 I think I mean Wipe it. Remove all the data.

Depending on how sensitive the data is, reinstalling the OS from scratch before you give it away, including formating the disk will prevent anyone short of a professional from retrieving it.

There are many freeware programs that will perform a "Security Wipe" on the disk if you are more concerned.  They basically overwrite the entire disk multiple times with random binary data.

Or just take out the disk drive before you give it away.  Disks are cheap now.

82

Posted by: Ben at December 27, 2010 10:36 AM (wuv1c)

this analysis is spot on, Christine O'Donell was a great example of this though I won't mention anymore of that race because of the knee-jerk reactions some have to defending her no matter how factual what you say is

See, now she is a major exception. She had been under media scrutiny before she ran. She was on TV, had run before, and had a public life. And in my opinion, she had been found wanting.

I understand a lot of people backed her simply because they didn't like Castle, which is fair.

Please other commenters don't see this as a prompt to restart this fight.

83 Thanks for the tips.
(Damn, $100 for the "Wipe Drive Pro"!)

84 I think the thread really could have stopped with #32, who was so spot-on that I feel no need to add anything.  Not that I won't anyway, o'course...

@77:  Inexperienced I'll give you, and I'll add bad at press relations -- they savaged him, and he gave them plenty to work with.  However, I don't think Miller was necessarily too conservative.  We never really had a chance to find that out in a fair way, though, did we?  Just him vs. McAdams?  In a two-way race, I wonder whether Miller still doesn't manage to pull it out, and whether a lot of Lisa's voters don't hold their noses and come home anyway.  If they had, he'd have won, no doubt about it.

85 If this is allowed to stand, with out the legal challenge.  Then all future election should be done by a show of hands!

86

Posted by: Vic at December 27, 2010 10:46 AM (M9Ie6)

my point has been made, too busy covering the ears and not listening to the truth; it is a FACT she didn't pay her 08 staffers, it is a FACT she had people of her's acusse Castle of being a homosexual, it is a FACT that she had claimed to be a witch which shouldn't matter but did hurt in the campaign, and it is a FACT that she though Biden was tapping her phone and hiding in the bushes stalking her. it is alos a FACT that she tried getting a staffer to intimidate a talk radio host who was interviewing her and caught her on Video doing it!

there was lots of BS on O'Donell and lots of disgusting personal attacks on her, but there was plenty factual against her

87 the Joke about the Young Bull, and the Old Bull? Posted by: Romeo13

Colors, walk down and fuck  'em all, Miller. After all, tomorrow is another day.

88 This isn't about him trying to win the seat. It's about him trying to end the bullshit or at least bring it into the light of day the corruption of the courts and court-made law affecting an election in favour of a privileged candidate.

LisaM had two laws overturned through the courts that are mutually exclusive concepts: she got the "no leaflets [etc.] in the polling area" overturned to get over the hurdle of the (then) legal requirement of spelling the name absolutely correctly; and then got the "spelling the name absolutely correctly" law overturned. Screw that.

89 Damn, $100 for the "Wipe Drive Pro"

Cheaper to buy a new disk than that.  $100 will get you a 1TB SATA drive these days.

Plenty of shareware programs out there for the wipe though.  Google Freeware Security Wipe.

90

Yes, your argument falls apart as soon as you put up ALL the tea party/Palin conservative candidates instead of cherry picking only the ones who lost.

Yeah, I don't buy that Rush Limbaugh line that Conservative will always win everywhere.

There are some places that don't like or want conservatives. Fiscal Conservatives, Social Conservatives, Libertarians, etc. They want nothing to do with them.

These places are willing to accepts a certain degree of conservatism, but not enough to our liking.

I think we need to admit there are places in America in which a conservative won't win a local election. Otherwise we're just fooling ourselves.

I'm not excited by that or happy with it, but reality exists outside of my personal desires.

91

you can say buh-bye to Brown in MA in 2012, same will happen in Maine

Posted by: YRM (The 2nd Youngest Ace Commenter) at December 27, 2010 10:40 AM (K2kVm)

Neither of those will be happening.  An upset primary win is predicated on the condition that either 1) the seat is open or 2) the incumbent is too much of an apostate to earn the Republican name - for their state.

Scott Brown seems vulnerable, until you take into account the fact that he's the most popular politician in MA, he's the only statewide elected Republican, and he actually has a good amount of charisma.  Snowe has none, but the bench in Maine consists of her, Collins, and Paul LePage, who was saved by Snowe's late husband from homelessness and probably death in his teenage years.  She's going nowhere.

92

Please other commenters don't see this as a prompt to restart this fight.

too late I was just guilty of it w/ "Vic" considering the venom and red-on-red that it produces i'll lave whatever he replies back with as is

93 "any proof of your claims or just wishful thinking?" Now how the hell would I have proof? Other than the stories of ballot boxes arriving at the polling places already full, and knowing full well 100k people wouldn't be interested enough, nor could you pay them enough, to write in 'Joe Smith' let alone write in Leeza and spell it right. Think about the ratlike ability of professional politicians to lie, cheat, connive and scratch and scrape to get into power and stay there. If I had a junkie living next door and my house got burglarized, I'd assume the junkie did it. Same logic applies here. I assume cheating was involved and it was done by Leeza's flunkies, and I'd place a large wager that the overwhelming majority were done in the same handwriting. Do you have proof gravity exists? No, no one does, but it seems to explain a lot of things very well, so until a better theory comes along, I believe in gravity. And I also believe politicians will lie and cheat at every opportunity.

94 91 IIRC, I downloaded the demo for FREE.  Worked a charm.

95 #65/Lincoln- Get everything off of the HD that you want to save, then reformat, all the way down to the BIOS, the HD 3 or 4 times If you are really anal, you can get a "wipe" program and dial-up the parameters on a DoD Secure Wipe and set it to write-over 27 times, and then re-format the whole thing. Will take a long time.

96 I think we need to admit there are places in America in which a conservative won't win a local election. Otherwise we're just fooling ourselves.

Unless they are the 51st Senator or something, what's the point of electing non-conservatives?  The milk-train to destruction as opposed to the express?

Liberal Republicans taint the brand.

97

Posted by: Lou at December 27, 2010 10:54 AM (IH3P2)

I hope your right, as much as they may be "RINOs" we need them in the Senate

98

Scott Brown seems vulnerable, until you take into account the fact that he's the most popular politician in MA, he's the only statewide elected Republican, and he actually has a good amount of charisma.  Snowe has none, but the bench in Maine consists of her, Collins, and Paul LePage, who was saved by Snowe's late husband from homelessness and probably death in his teenage years.  She's going nowhere.

I'm not too familiar with Mass local politics, but I recall the media claiming that Martha Coakley was a bad candidate. Who is next in line to challange Brown?

99

Posted by: cali grump at December 27, 2010 10:55 AM (hL0k

no proof other then accounts by voters of the losing candidates? my God those accounts by losing candidate supporters only happen WITH EVERY STINKING ELECTION

100

Posted by: Lou at December 27, 2010 10:54 AM (IH3P2)

Yeah but it doesnt matter what voters in the states actually think. Federalism, states rights, local governance. local control and the grass roots are for losers. What happens in Maine and Massachusetts must be determined by Baptists living in Macon, Georgia and cattle ranchers living in Texas.

That's the way the founding fathers would have wanted it.

101 If you elect a RINO as the "51st Senator" you make his vote the most attractive and expensive to buy. 

102 Plenty of shareware programs out there for the wipe though.  Google Freeware Security Wipe.


Thanks. Now if Office Depot would just call and tell me the new one is ready for pick-up I'll run that. Until then, this computer is a dead box walking.

103 She admitted she had dabbled in witchcraft as a teenager! part of her testifying to her Christian faith, she had a shoe string budget in 2008, and many of those staffers
went over to CREW, what happened to that FEC investigation, want to bet nothing
comes of it, meanwhile Biden had a quarter million dollar fine, because he broke the law, If the likes of Tom Ross was willing to make up death threats, I don't put anything past them

104 This isn't about him trying to win the seat. It's about him trying to end the bullshit or at least bring it into the light of day the corruption of the courts and court-made law affecting an election in favour of a privileged candidate.

Posted by: andycanuck at December 27, 2010 10:52 AM (2rOwc)

Fine.  But y'know, he's just making himself look awful in the process.  So I hope he never wanted to run for U.S. Senate again in the future.

As for dealing with the fact that the candidate is so privileged, hasn't anyone thought of the idea that it would be MUCH simpler and MUCH more effective to just close the damn loophole in the law that allowed her to still declare as a write-in candidate -- by making the last day to declare a write-in candidacy the day of the primary, perhaps -- and then find a good conservative candidate who could SUCCESSFULLY PRIMARY HER AGAIN?

105

Off-Topic: but by the way, my gf's mom who is a dem-leaning indy who loves Obama and hates Bush actually bought the Decision Points book and gave it to me for x-mas knowing I was a righty; kindness or a sign that some are open to changing their minds?

106 What happens in Maine and Massachusetts must be determined by Baptists living in Macon, Georgia and cattle ranchers living in Texas.

Indeed.  Since Scott Brown has the power to fuck me over, I will not be denied the right to fuck him back.

The Founding Fathers would have understood.

107

I think we need to admit there are places in America in which a conservative won't win a local election. Otherwise we're just fooling ourselves.

Unless they are the 51st Senator or something, what's the point of electing non-conservatives?  The milk-train to destruction as opposed to the express?

Liberal Republicans taint the brand.

Then in that case what's the point of winning the senate?

There are 50 states(not 57), and I don't believe that there are 25 of them that are extremely conservative. So we're never going to get 50 true blue conservatives.

The best we can hope for is 40 or so very conservative senators, and 10-20 moderate senators.

Also, when I say moderate I mean Corker moderate, not Jim Jeffords moderate.

 

108 So why do we bother to have laws when judges and bureaucrats have no restrictions on what they can actually do?

109

Off-Topic: but by the way, my gf's mom who is a dem-leaning indy who loves Obama and hates Bush actually bought the Decision Points book and gave it to me for x-mas knowing I was a righty; kindness or a sign that some are open to changing their minds?

when you opened it up did white powder fall out?

110 Moderate Republicans fuck you while wearing nicer suits.

111 Pardon my stupid question (I was drinking Kennedys last night -> it's like a Chivas/Klonopin 8-ball)

Even if Miller does not succeed, can any of this federal litigation stuff smack the Ak states courts for there seemingly shady interpretation of their own state's laws?

P.S  Fuck Al Gore and his damn gerbil wormining.

112 Liberal Republicans taint the brand.

Posted by: toby928™ at December 27, 2010 10:56 AM (S5YRY)

You are only half correct.  Liberal Republicans in red states taint the brand.  That's why we get so angry with Dick Lugar, John Cornyn, Kay Hutchison, and Bob Corker.  They hand over everything to Democrats and get nothing back, and hail from blood-red states.  It's one reason we were so happy that Lee took down Bennett - it's because we knew he would win the seat.

Lugar, Corker, and Hutchison are up in 2012.  The time is now to scout people.  I've heard Michael Williams in Texas - is he the best there is, or should we keep searching?  Our candidates only get better the more we examine them.  It's this type of thinking that will let us eat our cake and have it too - a Senate Majority with a solid core of conservatives.

113

Posted by: toby928™ at December 27, 2010 11:00 AM (S5YRY)

and then you'll be fucked over even more by someone who likes to fuck you over more then Brown did

 

Posted by: Ben at December 27, 2010 11:01 AM (wuv1c)

no lol she's not the usual hate all Obama critics Obama supporter, she shocked me when she said she even wanted to read the book after I was done w/ it

114 95 "any proof of your claims or just wishful thinking?"

Posted by: cali grump at December 27, 2010 10:55 AM (hL0k   Cali Grump, I rue that I cannot muster the cynicism you so ably express. If I had only a fraction I would have saved countless on the tears I´ve shed. I salute you, sir. 

115 YRM (The 2nd Youngest Ace Commenter)

"2nd youngest," meaning born the day before yesterday?
/Someone else has a couple millennia dibs on that.

116 108 What happens in Maine and Massachusetts must be determined by Baptists living in Macon, Georgia and cattle ranchers living in Texas.

Indeed.  Since Scott Brown has the power to fuck me over, I will not be denied the right to fuck him back.

The Founding Fathers would have understood.

Posted by: toby928™ at December 27, 2010 11:00 AM (S5YRY)

Then vote for his opponent. Michael Capuano will give you the ass fucking of a lifetime... that is if you can vote. Or, perhaps, your just a whiney internet activist who spends his days pissing in the wind.

117 Liberal Republicans in red states taint the brand.

We will have to agree to disagree.  Moderate Republicans make our ass raping Bipartisan, whatever state they represent.

118 Or, perhaps, your just a whiney internet activist who spends his days pissing in the wind.

Heh.

119

Posted by: Lou at December 27, 2010 11:03 AM (IH3P2)

100% agree, Lugar is the one who annoys me the most he did vote against stimulus and Obamacare but he still fucking supported the Dem for President, fucking traitor; sorry I just can't stand that guy

120 LisaM had two laws overturned through the courts that are mutually exclusive concepts: she got the "no leaflets [etc.] in the polling area" overturned to get over the hurdle of the (then) legal requirement of spelling the name absolutely correctly; and then got the "spelling the name absolutely correctly" law overturned. Screw that.

Posted by: andycanuck at December 27, 2010 10:52 AM (2rOwc)

 

Thank you.  This has been my point from the beginning of the thread.  If this isn't completely exposed and corrected, what's to stop the Murkowski establishment or any democrat legal force from doing it again, ad infinitem, even if conservatives put up perfect candidates.  What the AK courts did was wrong.  Miller should, for the sake of any conservative candidate, show the dem legal machine that we're not buying into this shit anymore. 

121 Yeah, Miller should just let it go...

...just like Coleman let it go with Franken, and Bush should have let it go with Gore, and Gregoire's opponent in Washington, and so many others this year who originally won, but then lost in close recounts. who cares that hundreds of ballots in Alaska appear to have the exact same handwriting? Who cares that there seem to be more ballots from some districts than actual registered voters? Who cares that Murkowski was allowed to hand out flyers spelling her name correctly even though Alaska law seems to forbid it? Just let it go.

122 you don't think it's "fair" for people to elect a self-important, "entitled" pork-spreader to office.

The voters of Massachusetts did that for decades.

Did? Past Tense?

123

Posted by: maverick muse at December 27, 2010 11:04 AM (H+LJc)

well the youngest is 20, i'm 21 and my b-day is in March are you saying it turns out i'm the 3rd youngest? if so i'll have to change my sig

124

You are only half correct.  Liberal Republicans in red states taint the brand.  That's why we get so angry with Dick Lugar, John Cornyn, Kay Hutchison, and Bob Corker. 

I agree with this.

First conservatives need to focus on getting the most conservative senators in the most conservative states.

To the idealists out there who dream of 51 conservative senators, do me a favor, get Lindsey Graham replaced with a conservative and then we'll talk okay?

As it stand we can't even get real conservatives in states that are prone to voting republican. Let's work on that before we have dreams of sweeping conservative tide in New England or the West Coast.

125 For what it's worth, I'd rather have a tainted brand than a branded taint...

126

Posted by: Scott Brown proudly sitting in the Kennedy Seat at December 27, 2010 11:07 AM (bgcml)

Do. Present Tense.

127
Where are Obama's other records? School records? His entire past is nonexistent.

Posted by: Soothsayer for RNC Chair at December 27, 2010 10:31 AM (mpQs4)

This really grates. Bush's grades, military records, and medical records were all important pieces of information the public HAD TO SEE according to the State Media.

We have nothing on Obama and yet the media considers anyone that wants some of this documentation, that until 2008 was considered a normal request, is a wingnut. 

Hell we know more about Joe the Plumber then Barack Obama.

128

Posted by: Ben at December 27, 2010 11:09 AM (wuv1c)

this

 

Posted by: g at December 27, 2010 11:07 AM (n2jRF)

now I understand why Gore voters still can't get over 2000, you know Murky never lost a recount

129 If only we could elect more solid, conservative folks like Scott Brown.

ooops.

Posted by: TXMarko at December 27, 2010 10:31 AM (DJUOi)

Hey if you don't ask if I'm a leftwinger, I won't tell...deal?

130 What ever happened to the good ole days of flintlock pistols at 10 paces?

Or would Murkluntski's fish eyes give Miller an unfair advantage?

131

Posted by: Ben at December 27, 2010 11:09 AM (wuv1c)

Truth.

132 Yeah, Miller should just let it go...

...just like Coleman let it go with Franken, and Bush should have let it go with Gore, and Gregoire's opponent in Washington, and so many others this year who originally won, but then lost in close recounts.

Posted by: g at December 27, 2010 11:07 AM (n2jRF)

All of whom still had a chance to win their race.  So the equivalency you're trying to draw is a false one, because Miller has lost.  No matter what happens going forward, he's done for.  And yes, he's at the point where he SHOULD let it go.  The most profitable avenue going forward is to make sure that in future, Lisa Murkowski cannot both run as the Republican nominee and file as a write-in candidate...and then, in six years, make sure she can't run as the Republican nominee.

133

Posted by: Fritz at December 27, 2010 11:12 AM (GwPRU)

in the good old days, people in congress beat each other with sticks

134 Oh, yeah, and then there's also that Begich guy to take care of.  Instead of continuing to cry over Miller, maybe we ought to get ready to take HIM out.

135

Is Miller some how causing pain in any of your lives? It is  his fucking time and money, not ours. He should take to the highest court to see if the written rules and laws mean anything or not.

Just my humble opinion.

136 Scott Brown won MA because the Dems were "surprised" by the Republican surge. You can see what happened in 2010 in MA when the Dems fired up their union driven GOTV effort.

He will not win again regardless of how many times he crosses over and votes with the Dems.

137
So the people who are taking a big leap of faith are the ones who believe Obama was born in the U.S.

Posted by: Soothsayer for RNC Chair at December 27, 2010 10:33 AM (mpQs4)

Back during the 2000 election, I remember one of the talking points of the left was that we need complete transparency and due diligence in elections (except for counting hanging chads, but I digress). In a mere eight years we've gone to the left arguing that it really doesn't matter if we cross the "i"s and "t"s because well, no one cares except for crazies.

I do think Obama was born in HI...but the media should have been raising hell as soon as the Obama camp got coy about providing the original document for public review.

138 And for those wanting a longer, more accurate and less biased account of Miller continuing the court case than the one Gabe provided from the leftist shit-rag, the Anchorage Daily News, here's an AP report including Miller quotes like the following:

Miller said late Sunday that after "careful consideration and seeking the counsel of people whose opinion I respect and trust," he decided not to fight certification but to press on with his case.

"We want the end result of this legal action to be for the people of Alaska to not only have full faith in the outcome of this race but a confidence in the manner in which elections will be conducted in our state in the future," he said. "Election integrity is vital."

Miller contends the state violated the election and equal protection clauses of the U.S. Constitution in its handling of the vote count.

[Via Weasel Zippers]

139 Cali Grump, I rue that I cannot muster the cynicism you so ably express.

Just keeping it light, sauce on the side. 

140 Too many big babies out there whoopin' up a colic epidemic as if whatever Miller chooses to do next is going to make the sun rise or set on his own future, the Tea Party movement, or the Republican Party. Let him work things out for himself without acting as if you must delete his existence in order for your own to survive. Ignore him if he bothers you.

Get off his back and on to ride Murky's ass.

141 Scott Brown seems vulnerable, until you take into account the fact that he's the most popular politician in MA

He's toast in 2012.

I'd guess he'll win the primary if there is one, but he's screwed himself on the votes he cast in the lame duck session.

Given a choice between a liberal or a liberal, MA will select the one with a D next to his name in 2012.

142 Why did Obama pay so much to suppress his personal documents?  A Pultizter  and worldwide fame surely await the journoloist who digs out some of the documents and answers this question.  Yet, there are no takers.

143 138 Scott Brown won MA because the Dems were "surprised" by the Republican surge. You can see what happened in 2010 in MA when the Dems fired up their union driven GOTV effort.

He will not win again regardless of how many times he crosses over and votes with the Dems.

Posted by: Vic at December 27, 2010 11:16 AM (M9Ie6)

Maybe, maybe not. But conservatives who have no clue about Massachusetts have been predicting his demise since the Fin Reg vote and he remains the most popular politician in Massachusetts.

Why they are so obsessed with Republicans from the most liberal state in the Union is beyond me.

 

 

 

144

Is Miller some how causing pain in any of your lives? It is  his fucking time and money, not ours. He should take to the highest court to see if the written rules and laws mean anything or not.

Just my humble opinion.

Posted by: Velvet Ambition at December 27, 2010 11:16 AM (CcqND)

 

Agree again.  This is really what this is all about as far as I'm concerned.  It's not whether Miller is a sore loser.  It's about the rule of law.  Something that many people on this thread have forgotten.  And saying that, it's no wonder we find our nation in the shape that it's in right now.  There's no more rules, laws, or guidlines.  It's the socialist revolutionay's dream.  

145 andycanuck

That's what Miller explained he was doing when interviewed this past month by Fred Thompson who ended up allowing Miller's legal contention legitimacy, though clearly not how Teh Fred would personally handle it, being the guy who dropped out of the '08 campaign before the vast majority of states had their primaries.

146 Posted by: 18-1

One thing that could work in Brown's favor is that the MA Dems are so damned corrupt, spiteful and inbred that very few of them can "rise to the top" without stepping on somebody's toes who knows where their particular bodies are buried. Or who has closer personal ties to whatever Union/Public Agency/State bureaucracy is wielding the most power/raising the most cash in any given election cycle. Martha Coakley was no higher than the 10th most powerful Dem in MA, which is why she squeaked through to the top, but in the end had no real constituency.

147 Martha Coakley was no higher than the 10th most powerful Dem in MA, which is why she squeaked through to the top, but in the end had no real constituency.

They don't want nobody that nobody sent.

148 All of whom still had a chance to win their race.  So the equivalency you're trying to draw is a false one, because Miller has lost.

Isn't there value in investigating any potential case of election fraud to the hilt? Even if there is none?

Part of the reason we have Sen Franken is not only did the Democrats succeed in stealing an election, but they believed they could get away with it in the first place.

If the Democrats knew that every questionable election would have the whole process subjected to an intense examination it might dissuade some of them.

Of course I'd like to see interference in a federal election made an automatic life sentence with no hope for parole which would likely help more.

149 One thing that could work in Brown's favor is that the MA Dems are so damned corrupt, spiteful and inbred that very few of them can "rise to the top" without stepping on somebody's toes who knows where their particular bodies are buried.

I expect we will see Sen Capuauno (sp?) come 2012. Brown surprised the Dems, and didn't have Obama on the ballot.

His only hope in 2012, IMO, was to vote conservative on all the inside baseball votes - START, DADT, and play moderate on the high profile stuff like Fin Regs.

That was basically the line I thought he was running on. But he got absolutely played in the lame duck session.

150 I don't think Miller thinks he's going to become senator anytime soon. Conservatives must fight for the Law to say what it means and mean what it says. Otherwise why have the Constitution say that State legislatures control how elections are conducted, but some court can come along and say, "Um, no that statute needs a tweak here and there"? The Florida Supremes tried to steal the 2000 Election and got bitch-slapped by the SCOTUS. The Alaska Supremes need a slap, too.

151 This really grates. Bush's grades, military records, and medical records were all important pieces of information the public HAD TO SEE according to the State Media.
And let's not forget cocaine use. When it's from 35 (?) years ago from unsubstantiated, questionable sources before giving up booze (and presumably coke) forever after a religious and personal conversion, it's still a most serious matter for current physical and mental health reasons that should exclude someone from the presidency or at least be a factor in making him an unsuitable choice for an individual's vote. Under Barry, not so much.

152

Scott Brown is often the deciding vote, so Harry Reid only brings issues to the floor when he knows he has Scott. It sucks for Scott because his record remains much more conservative than the voting record indicates.

He ran against ObamaCare, Cap and Trade, and new taxes. He was opposed to card check and amnesty. He remains opposed to all that. The reason immigration vote never came to the floor was because of him.

In the lame duck, he pushed for tax cuts, was a vocal opponent of Omnibus and had no earmarks in that bill, when Chambliss, Sessions, Vitter... and all those "real" conservatives did. He helped kill Omnibus and DREAM Act.

He voted against Elena Kagan. Supported Jan Brewer and SB 1070. Opposed civilian trials for terrorists, closing GITMO...

He actually ran as an independent voice, and a person who would work with Democrats. He also ran against Wall Street and as a social moderate.

There are no suprises here unless you're deluded.

So please spare me the Mark Levin hysterics. The best thing Brown has going for him in 2012 is that his opponents look like lunatics. Anyone who thinks Ted Kennedy would have help the same positions is smoking crack.

People here know the diference. Even if whiney, spoiled, loser nutjobs dont.

 

153 It's about the rule of law.  Something that many people on this thread have forgotten. --  Soona

Gabe Malor loves convenience. About the only thing Gabe "conserves" is his progressive smorgasbord. He's too smart-assed to identify personally as a constructionist with the Constitution; and being an Alinsky wannabe tosses the paleo-con boomerang unaware that he's whipping his own ass by ridiculing those who necessarily must align in order to defeat progressive authoritarianism. No way will Gabe ever put out to uphold a constitutional principle, preferring the latest mutant fashion to the essence. It's always others who must do the heavy lifting, AND succeed before he assumes the position of having been on board all along. Do recall his ridicule of Arizona's illegal immigrant flood, as Arizona dealt as best they could under the sabotage of "let amnesty be" governing bipartisan officials like Napolitano and McCain, on an unfunded budget. Gabe made it all about getting rid of Sheriff Joe because Arpaio just didn't have Gabe's metromale fetish nail polish, having worked his way up through the school of hard knocks actually enforcing law instead of attending law school for boys with "clean" corrupt hands.

Yeah, apologies to all those lawyers who actually DO pro bono, particularly pro bono work for American citizens, pro bono work to strengthen the integrity of the Constitution rather than ram through the Constitution's bulwarks with social justice.

My grandfather was an attorney and a great man who never stopped working with his hands, the hands of a working man as he'd been born and raised, a great sharp shooter. He never "retired" to be certain that all he knew were clothed and fed with a roof over their heads, helping families stay together during the Great Depression.

154 People here know the diference. Even if whiney, spoiled, loser nutjobs dont.

Still trying to win people over?

155 It is a shame that Alaskans believe "their" pork is more important than the future of the Republic.

156 156 People here know the diference. Even if whiney, spoiled, loser nutjobs dont.

Still trying to win people over?

Posted by: toby928™ at December 27, 2010 11:52 AM (S5YRY)

Not really. Just trying to keep the semi-retarded nihilist wing of the party from interfering with our 2012 elections. I didnt much care what they think until they start meddling with primaries.

We have good people here. They are a minority, but they deserve some represenation. They idea that a Barney Frank or Martha Coakley is the same is a non-starter. I will protect my people because no one else will. The Left eill step on them, and national conservatives would let them in order to preserve their "brand".

Plus, Brown has been a boon for our candidate recruitment and fundraising on all levels.

 

157 Plus, Brown has been a boon for our candidate recruitment

Are you referring to the Nov 2010 shutout the MA Rep party scored?

158 As if you know a damned thing, Gabe.

159 Not really. Just trying to keep the semi-retarded nihilist wing of the party from interfering with our 2012 elections.

You're not likely to succeed in your quest, at least not with your current tactics.

160 132 What ever happened to the good ole days of flintlock pistols at 10 paces?

Or would Murkluntski's fish eyes give Miller an unfair advantage?

Posted by: Fritz at December 27, 2010 11:12 AM (GwPRU)

Would work for me... isn't Miller an Army Vet with the Air Assault badge??

of course /looks back at the numerous swords on his walls

I much prefer swords myself... takes much of the potential luck out of it..

161 "no proof other then accounts by voters of the losing candidates? my God those accounts by losing candidate supporters only happen WITH EVERY STINKING ELECTION" Non sequitur. Of course that happens. What doesn't happen is 100k write-in votes for one candidate.

162 Non sequitur. Of course that happens. What doesn't happen is 100k write-in votes for one candidate.

Posted by: cali grump at December 27, 2010 12:09 PM (hL0k

Actually, when was the last time someone won federal office as a write in?

163

Actually, when was the last time someone won federal office as a write in?

Posted by: 18-1 at December 27, 2010 12:13 PM (bgcml)

Strom Thurmond in 1956.

164 164 "no proof other then accounts by voters of the losing candidates? my God those accounts by losing candidate supporters only happen WITH EVERY STINKING ELECTION"

Non sequitur. Of course that happens. What doesn't happen is 100k write-in votes for one candidate.

Posted by: cali grump at December 27, 2010 12:09 PM (hL0k

Yes, there are thousands of fake calls to the Police every day... so I guess the Police should stop investigating crimes!

Unless I"M the one who calls, of course...

165

Strom Thurmond in 1956.

Posted by: Vic at December 27, 2010 12:20 PM (M9Ie6)

Why am I not surprised the State Media never mentioned that during Morecokeski's run?

166

Why am I not surprised the State Media never mentioned that during Morecokeski's run?

Posted by: 18-1 at December 27, 2010 12:24 PM (bgcml)

They did I think. As a matter of fact up until MooKow he is the ONLY candidate to win a write-in campaign for Senate.

167 So, when I'm seated, the dealers will use my old senate number, right?

168 The law, is the law, is the law. It either means the words with which it is written, or it means whatever someone in power wants it to mean. The law as written was broken, ignore it at freedom's peril.

169 Murky will be seated and she will keep her seniority.

That's because McConnell and the rest of the Republican "leadership" are invertebrates. They can't do the right thing without being vigorously pushed in the appropriate direction, and even then there's no guarantee they'll actually deliver.

170 160 Plus, Brown has been a boon for our candidate recruitment

Are you referring to the Nov 2010 shutout the MA Rep party scored?

Posted by: 18-1 at December 27, 2010 12:04 PM (bgcml)

Want to take a look at the 2006 and 2008 scorecard? We couldnt even get people to run. The only reason there was a Jeff Perry was because of Brown.

By the way, how much did you donate to Karyn Polito and Mary Z? And after you dispose of Brown, I suppose you'll be ready to put the Mass GOP on your back and fill in the void.