1 Miller was a miscalculation. Alsakans, though conservative 99% of the time, sure love them some porky pork. Miller scared the shit outta them - and instead of re-assuring them they will still get their "share", he played hardball till Muerkowowski nailed him good. Politics is a craft, and RINOs are good craftsmen.

2 And, in a surprise announcement, Murkowski comes out against the ban on earmarks.

http://tinyurl.com/2e6romu

3 I don't know what he should do. I am sort of ambivalent about it. MooKowShit should have conceded and waited for the 2012 election and she didn't.

Should he drag it out forever as a form of payback or should he just drop everything and wait for 2012 himself?

If he took the second option he could save some money for the next election so that is probably his best bet.

In the meantime the Republican Party needs to get control of the lawlessness that runs rampant in the election commission. The Supremes ruled long long ago that you could not change election law in the middle of counting votes.

4 Was markycow doin the counting? She does seem even more left then most RINO's.

Voting is screwed. There is no control over who votes where and as long as more vote the tard faction knows they can sway em to them.. We have a tard collage town that keeps them in power here. They don't live here but we get to pay for their vote...sucks

5 She does seem even more left then most RINO's.

She votes on the hairy edge of DIABLO, so yes, she is more left than most RINOs. There is a reason she was primaried out.

6 The Supremes ruled long long ago that you could not change election law in the middle of counting votes.

Definitely grounds for an electoral law suit. Now, where's the vested Republican interest to pursue justice? Better atmosphere now than ever to push for a cleansing.

Murkowski comes out against the ban on earmarks.

Seems that was specifically what the sow won on. Oikety pork, it's what Alaskans seem once again to choose. What a huge image contrast, Palin/Miller v. Madcowsow

7 There is a reason she was primaried out.
Posted by: Vic


Problem being she wasn't primaried out enough....We need to fire who ever was in charge of that aspect.

8 Moldscruntski stinks   ...I just wanted to write moldscruntski.

9 Problem being she wasn't primaried out enough....We need to fire who ever was in charge of that aspect.

Posted by: beanervt at November 17, 2010 07:44 AM (e6cT

Not sure what else could be done. Hell she was forced into a write-in campaign which in most States would be be a near impossibility.

if the AK election commission had abided by the law in place at the start of the election with regard to the lists and making sure that her name was spelled accurately I think she would ave lost big time.

So yes, in way she stole it but other than the crooks who appear to still run the State of AK, who can you blame?

10 Murkowski comes out against the ban on earmarks.

Now as to the Senate Republican Caucus handling of her in leadership positions. Shit on Cornyn's campaign endorsement. Madcowsow is the plague that just keeps on giving.

As to the election ballot hand count, that would provide opportunity to validate the roll of participating voters, whether all are alive and actually registered.

 /I'd add whether actually US citizens, but doubt that illegal aliens target Alaska as their point of destination. Russians and Chinese would be accustomed to that climate, though not the moment's matter of concern.

11 I don't like Miller losing, but this stinks of sore loser.  It is as if he were a Democrat or something.  I'm not an Alaskan, so I only get to pay for her earmarks, but let it go this time, already.  There will be other elections.

12 Well, Miller didn't actually turn out to be the dream candidate everyone was hoping for, either.

He ran a shitty campaign, especially the part where his goons put a reporter in handcuffs and detain him.. on camera!  And.. he needed a shave, for cripes sake..

13 Largely, I blame the GOP Senate caucus for this.

Murkowski's only advantage in the election was that she would slather out pork to greedy Alaska. (Alaska is one of only a few states to get more money from the federal government than they pay in, and gets the most). 

When the GOP caucus decided she could keep her current committee positions, they pretty much endorsed her in the only way that mattered - she would have her seniority and be able to keep the graft spigot flowing to her 'rugged' home state.

14 It has just come out that she is opposing the earmarks ban.  Well, of course, earmarks for Alaska is pretty much the reason she was elected.

Hard to believe this wormy rino was elected.

15

The Alaska Division of Elections, not surprisingly, isn't thrilled about the idea. The director says that recounts aren't done using hand counts, but rather by re-scanning the ballots with optical scanners.

One rule that Miller can't change, even he doesn't have sugar-daddy connections in Alaska's legal and political apparatus.

While Miller's willingness to fight is admirable, this may be a battle he cannot win, given his opponent's ruthlessness and willingness to bend the election rules to her advantage.  He should pull back, gear up for 2012, and be ready to rage total political war when the times comes.

16 Miller campaign spokesman Randy DeSoto said "Lisa Murkowski spent hundreds of thousand of dollars on her spelling bee ad making it very clear that she knew what standard was expected and what had been applied for decades in this state prior to her write-in bid. She spent tens of thousands of dollars on wristbands, pencils, brochures, and temporary tattoos emphasizing the need for proper spelling. She even convinced the Division of Elections to provide (and went to court to make sure it continued to provide), for the first time in 50 years and, in violation of its own regulations, a write-in list so that voters would know how to spell her name properly. Then, the Division of Elections took the extraordinary step of changing the standard, just 36 hours prior to the start of the count to a newly created "voter intent" and/or phonetic standard." Miller observers have seen the Division of Elections apply the statute's standard ("name, as it appears on the write-in declaration of candidacy") to other declared write-in candidates while applying the voter intent/phonetic standard to Murkowski's. DeSoto noted, "The integrity of the vote is at issue. The people of Alaska need to know the law is king, and just because you're a Murkowski doesn't mean that the rules get changed to your benefit."

17 Hard to believe this wormy rino was elected.

Posted by: Bill Mitchell at November 17, 2010 08:15 AM (Baf0e)

She won this via one mechanism and it had nothing to do with "Miller's campaign". Her election was the direct result of crooked and corrupt machine politics.

Once again the will of the people is thwarted and the flea ridden dogs of corruption win again.

Next time the people need to pay a lot more attention to who gets on the courts.

18 kratos while he may not win, i say he drags it out....one, because he is right and it is his right and two.....i'm still not over that bitch sanchez in orange co. ca, who stole the election by having illegals votings ending b-one bob dornan's political career..... he had a case but was encouraged to quit by the party for the good of the party and country...we need to stop handing elections to people who did not acutally play by the clearly set rules...

19 He ran a shitty campaign, especially the part where his goons put a reporter in handcuffs and detain him.. on camera!  And.. he needed a shave, for cripes sake..

This too.  Miller shouldn't be let off the hook for this.  He's the one who couldn't close the deal.

20 Should he drag it out forever as a form of payback or should he just drop everything and wait for 2012 himself?

The reason he should "drag it out" is that someone needs to (and he's the one with standing) challenge the legality of the election board (supported by the court) changing and ignoring the laws.  We've got to start nipping these things in the bud or we'll never be able to win close elections again. 

Also, he might actually win. 


Have the military votes and other absentee votes been counted yet?

21 Drag it out. Why not?

22 fuck shaving. He's a role model in that way.

23 #18 Posted by: phoenixgirl at November 17, 2010 08:26 AM (eOXTH)

He can fight this, but he will lose this particular battle because, as Vic said:

"She won this via one mechanism and it had nothing to do with "Miller's campaign". Her election was the direct result of crooked and corrupt machine politics."

I will amend my previous statement - Miller shouldn't drag out the recount, but he should have people look into Morecokeinsnoutski's connections into the machine and educate the Alaskan public in preparation for his 2012 campaign, should he decide to run.

Time to put a little sunshine on these bastards that aid and assist pols such as Murkdecinvagski.

24 When Palin was Governor a bunch of the corrupt Republicans were exposed for what they were and many of them ended up behind bars. After this election it is obvious that she didn't get them all.

25 Chitown Jerry

"Dream Candidate" running the perfect campaign? Obama ring a ding ding.

26

I think Joe Miller needs to really take stock of his chances of winning. If he can't overcome the lead, he should concede and save face so he can run again in 2014.

I hate Murkowski and the NRSC with the heat of a thousand suns.

27 He should pull back, gear up for 2012, and be ready to rage total political war when the times comes.

Kratos, I don't think the other Alaskan seat comes up until 2014.

Alaska is a crap hole politically. It's essentially Illinois but with a Republican in name machine instead of democrat.

The governor and the congressmen are murkowski lackeys. I can't believe we couldn't get rid of her.

I'm also bitter that no one will run against McConnell for the leadership position.

28 FEEL MY WRAAATTTHHHH

29

She votes on the hairy edge of DIABLO, so yes, she is more left than most RINOs. There is a reason she was primaried out.

I know what RINO stands for but can someone please tell me what is a DIABLO.

30

In an e-mail I received from Joe this morning:

Lisa Murkowski and her friends in the media has misled you.  They want you to believe that Joe has lost this election.  Below, we dismantle 5 common myths going around:

MYTH 1: Joe Miller is forcing the state of Alaska to count ballots.

Lisa Murkowski is forcing the count in Alaska – by ignoring the primary process (after
promising to stand by the results) and conducting a write-in campaign costing millions of dollars, Lisa ensured a drawn-out counting process would be
required to determine a victor.

MYTH 2: Lisa Murkowski is
beating Joe Miller

After 7 days of write-in ballot
counting, Republican nominee Joe Miller still leads incumbent Lisa Murkowski in the uncontested write-in ballot count. As of Monday night, nearly all
write-in votes have been counted.  Joe Miller has 90,448 uncontested votes and Murkowski only has 84.563. If current trends hold, Miller and
Murkowski will likely end up in a dead heat in the uncontested ballot count.

MYTH 3: Joe Miller is indiscriminately throwing out ballots

By law, Alaska statute mandates that the candidates name be spelled correctly. Joe Miller is challenging ballots based on that statute. As a strong believer in the rule of law and constitutional values, Joe believes in this high standard of proof required for write-in ballots to be considered.

Given that the counting process alone has cost the state significant time and resources, a strict interpretation of ballots is necessary to ensure election results are determined in a fair and timely manner. This is crucial for Alaskans to receive proper congressional representation.

MYTH 4: The law leaves it up to ballot counters to determine what ballots are legitimate

Lisa MurkowskiÂ’s campaign has spent considerable funds attempting to ensure that
her name is properly spelled on the write-in ballots, proving that she anticipated and prepared for a strict interpretation of law.  The law
allows no room for personal interpretation.  You spell it correctly, or you donÂ’t.

MYTH 5: There are no reports of fraud or voting irregularities

The Joe Miller campaign has documented numerous instances of voting irregularities.

While nothing can be done about these cases now that the election has already been held, the Joe Miller campaign believes that these cases prove why it is all the more necessary to ensure that there is strict interpretation on the ballot counting process.

31 Murkowski leads GOP pork addicts ‘going rogue’ in movement to flout earmark ban

DIABLO:  Democrat In All But Label Only

32 I'm also bitter that no one will run against McConnell for the leadership position.

Don't worry, DeMint will run in 2012 when we finally retake the Senate

33 What Miller is doing is first; dum spero spes and second punishing the Murk's supporters - he keeps her uncertified long enough, she loses her seat on the Energy committee to Burr. (reposted from other thread)

34 Manischewitzski has the votes, Joe.  Save your dough and that of the taxpayers.

Hopefully, her worst nightmares will come true in the new congress.

35 Truman, yeah I'm disappointed that our new R senator in Missouri, Blunt, is also apparently a porker

36 Yada yada yada. After all the griping for hyped fire in the belly required in campaign style as if that determines the best POTUS candidate (ending up with McCain v. Obama), I reject rhetoric which implies that campaign style is what voters demand to determine the best governing officials.

Obviously, new candidates who are new to politics won't necessarily be finessed and won't necessarily preach the hype on which the establishment supporting voters have developed an addiction. No surprise, not all new candidates are going to win, regardless of new candidate ideology.

When a new to politics candidate wins, great. Loses? I'm not going to dump on Miller's mistakes, nor do I have anything but admiration for Ruth McClung's near rocket scientist hit for Congress. Live, learn and keep up the conservative momentum.

37

Not a huge hater on earmarks, here, honestly.  It seems like an awful waste of time and energy to tackle this with such gusto and, you know, leave Obamacare, SS, Medicare, and various military spending of dubious value untouched.

All this talk on the earmark battle makes me think conservatives have already lost the war.

38 #27  Kratos, I don't think the other Alaskan seat comes up until 2014.

Alaska is a crap hole politically. It's essentially Illinois but with a Republican in name machine instead of democrat.

You are right of course, as Mark Begich took Steven's place in 2008.  Ugh, so we have 2 Dem Senators from Alaska until then.  

Palin didn't clean house enough before she left. 

Speaking of Alaska,

Search and rescue teams are searching for F-22 Raptor and pilot that went missing during flight over Alaska - U.S. officials via NBC News

/May they both be found unscathed. 

39 how's this for suckitude:
New R Senator from Missouri, Blunt, favors earmarks - but D Senator from Missouri, the hag McCaskill, opposes earmarks

40 Lisa Murkowski ran as an Independent, and was elected as an Independent Senator.

She's lost her membership in the Republican Senate Caucus.  Boot her out of all Republican Senate Committee chairmanships and committee membership.

41 McCaskill knows democrats will not be getting the lion's share of earmarks and wants to limit the damage R pork will do in 2012 and 2014.

42 Not much chance on the F-22, Kratos -- unless he found a abandoned runway.

43 chemjeff, maybe in cya mode they'll switch positions at the vote.

44 oh, this is good: from the Daily Caller article:

"Tuesday, [Empress Moocow] offered a novel defense of seeking earmarks for her state, saying that Alaska, a “young” state admitted into the Union in 1959, hasn’t been able to enjoy earmarks for as long as the other states."

45 The Earmark issue is a complete red herring, it is disappointing that the conservative blogs have taken the hook so deeply.

46 Palin didn't clean house enough before she left.

True.

47 40 Lisa Murkowski ran as an Independent, and was elected as an Independent Senator.

I agree with you (about taking away her committee assignments etc), but for some bizarre reason Murkowski - and many of the write-in protest candidates - was allowed to put an "R" next to her name.  At least, that's how they appeared on that list that the AK state board of elections provided.

I don't understand what the purpose of the primary is if candidates can run as Rs (or Ds) after they lose the damned thing. 

48 Pork! It's what's for politics! It's the other green meat!

49 "Alaska, a 'young' state admitted into the Union in 1959, hasnÂ’t been able to enjoy earmarks for as long as the other states." --murky

And on the other side of that coin, if Alaska can't manage its statehood affairs without dependency on federal earmarks, vote it back to a dependent Territory status.

50 @30

Thanks for posting that.  You should post it on every thread, especially the part about Loser Lisa causing the expensive counting process to occur. 

51 42 Not much chance on the F-22, Kratos -- unless he found a abandoned runway.

Mea culpa - I thought the F-22 was a two-seater for some stupid reason, so I was thinking pilot and co-pilot.  I'm a moron, but I'm moronic enough to think even an F-22 can survive a crash unscathed, . 

52 Not a huge hater on earmarks, here, honestly.  It seems like an awful waste of time and energy to tackle this with such gusto and, you know, leave Obamacare, SS, Medicare, and various military spending of dubious value untouched.

Considering how highly visible the waste of most earmarks are, if we can't get rid of them, how are we supposed to get rid of anything?

53

DIABLO:  Democrat In All But Label Only

Thanks, Truman.  I've seen this often on blogs but could not work out the acronym.

54 #51  I'm a moron, but I'm not moronic enough to think even an F-22 can survive a crash unscathed.

FIFM. 

btw, fuck Soros.  He's channeling Tom Friedman in this article.  If he thinks China is so great, why doesn't he (along with Friedman) move there and shut the hell up.

Soros: China has better functioning government than U.S.

55 maverick's comment at 49 illustrates the problem. Alaska doesn't get her pork thru the earmarking process; the term "earmark" has become synonymous with pork and its true meaning - and the specific thing being banned - is lost.

56 2
And, in a surprise announcement, Murkowski comes out against the ban on earmarks.
http://tinyurl.com/2e6romu
Posted by: Chitown Jerry at November 17, 2010 07:20 AM (Do52

Throw her out of the Republican Caucus in the 112th Congress.

57 O/T: FireDogLake update: they are still unhinged

from the comments:

"I canÂ’t bear to read WaPo. Last night as I was trying to wind down and fall asleep I found myself wondering how it was for people in 1930′s Germany, listening to radio and reading the propaganda press. I decided it was like this."

58 kratos - now the mythical F-35 ...

59 Y-not at November 17, 2010 09:08 AM

Decorating her INDEPENDENT ballot entry does not alter the status as an Independent.

Murkowski is an Independent Senator, just like Joe Lieberman. The Major Party Senate Leaders have every authority to boot Murkowski from all Senate Republican committee positions. They also have the authority to twist her arm to vote with the Republican leadership, or they'll hound her out of her tenured committee booty. PORK is on the EARMARK line drawn on the Senate Floor.

60 42: Absurd as it sounds, this is Alaska--a lot of places, your only access is air.  That still doesn't make intact recovery of the aircraft likely, but it does add to the options.

That said, I'll stick to praying for the pilot.

61 Bevel Lemelisk, your not getting rid of anything by banning the earmarking process. Your just letting the "experts" decide instead of the people.

62 @59
Yeah, I agree they should boot her.  I just don't think anyone can tell her to not call herself an R... maybe I'm wrong about that. 

63

All this talk on the earmark battle makes me think conservatives have already lost the war.

Posted by: Truman North at November 17, 2010 09:03 AM (HLGCA)

I don't know how you figure that, they have settled the earmark ban in the first two days of congress. If they save $18 billion every two days from now on we will get out of this mess.

64 I would not be surprised to see an F22 stand down for a while, when a new design falls out of the sky - questions have to be asked.

65 robtr - Nancy banned earmarks from last year bills - how much did we save?

66 Jean #33,
Miller keeps her uncertified long enough, she loses her seat on the Energy committee to Burr.

Wow, I didn't know. That alone is reason to support his demand for a hand recount of all votes.

67 O/T: Courtesy Instapundit: new airport security protocol

68 maverick - I think the date is 12 Dec for staff turnover, reassignment etc. (I could be wrong on that by a couple of days.)

69 Y-not #62
Murki can call herself whatever she pleases. But that of itself holds no more significance than her personal preference, nothing official and certainly no meaning in the Republican Caucus leadership positions of influence in Committees. Joe Lieberman still identifies himself personally as a Democrat; as if that maintained his leadership status in Democrat Committee memberships.

70 For a tick of good news:

Gatewaypundit posted yesterday that (D) incumbent Melissa Bean (IL- was defeated by (R) Joe Walsh.  Sure, it's not the senate, but that's in true blue IL, and worth celebrating.

71 69 Y-not #62
Murki can call herself whatever she pleases. But that of itself holds no more significance than her personal preference

Yes, but I bet it (having the R next to her name on the ballot) garnered her the majority of the votes she obtained on this election.  Clearly the Republicans in Alaska have some work to do to change their election rules so that the loser of the R primary is not allowed to run as a Republican in the general. 

But in terms of Loser Lisa's status in the Senate, assuming Miller is unsuccessful, I agree that she should be stripped of anything the Rs can take away from her. 

72 Bevel Lemelisk, your not getting rid of anything by banning the earmarking process. Your just letting the "experts" decide instead of the people.

I'm not sure I follow.  "The people" didn't decide to earmark $20 million on the defense bill for a museum to Ted Kennedy, John Kerry did.

Earmarks are high-profile waste items and part of the problem.  If they amount to such a small amount of cost, then getting rid of them should be painless, right?

73

don't know how you figure that, they have settled the earmark ban in the first two days of congress. If they save $18 billion every two days from now on we will get out of this mess.

but they didn't. Inhofe, Murki and Blount already said they won't abide by the ban.

She HAS TO LOSE HER SEAT. If the Republicans give Murky a seat of power after the new congress is sworn in, they clearly don't freaking get it.

74

The Earmark issue is a complete red herring, it is disappointing that the conservative blogs have taken the hook so deeply.

no we get it, but if we can't do the symbolic stuff, can we do the substanative stuff?

75 Bevel Lemelisk - reduce the DoD appropriation by 20M and/or get rid of John Kerry are your solutions. Without the earmarking process, who and how that $20M ended up funding a museum would have been totally opaque.

76 Jean,

Dec. 12th staff turnover, hm. Generally America unofficially officially shuts down beginning next week, government work included. A lax period vulnerable to attack. /George Washington's selected timing 

77 Bevel - the point of banning earmarks isn't really to save money, because it's a drop in the bucket - the point of banning earmarks is to diminish the corrupting influence they have, and also to change the culture of spending and 'you support my earmarks and I'll support yours' mentality that Congresscritters develop.

78 #74 no we get it, but if we can't do the symbolic stuff, can we do the substanative stuff?

Or if we can't cut the small things, how can we possibly get the political will to cut the large things?

This may be old news, but speaking of Palin (linky is to the NYT, be warned!)

“I am,” Sarah Palin told me the next day when I asked her if she was already weighing a run for president. “I’m engaged in the internal deliberations candidly, and having that discussion with my family, because my family is the most important consideration here.”

Palin went on to say that there weren’t meaningful differences in policy among the field of G.O.P. hopefuls “but that in fact there’s more to the presidency than that” and that her decision would involve evaluating whether she could bring unique qualities to the table.

79 73: Of course they don't get it.  That's why every last person in Congress must be primaried, every election, from now until the end of time.  If they can take the seat for granted, accountability is a myth.

No exceptions.  Ever.

80 sorry that should be directed to Jean, not Bevel

81 Calling the earmark ban a "red herring" is the last refuge of Lefties who want to keep their pork. Don't fall for it.
Stopping the practice this year (or limiting it as severely as possible) will mean billions and billions of savings in subsequent years. It will also make concrete the first step towards spending sanity.

82 Posted by: Jean at November 17, 2010 09:34 AM (xkJak)

Do you truly believe that appropriations bills are naively designed to NOT have earmarks in them, and they are just dissemination of the leftovers following bad estimates?  Ban earmarks and appropriations will go down.

As for opacity...earmarks are trophies to bring home proudly to your district.  If John Kerry couldn't take credit for the museum, he wouldn't build it.

83

The Earmark thing isn't a huge deal in that it will save a ton of money, it won't. It is a big deal in that it will be one less tool used to buy off reluctant votes for huge spending bills.

 

I liked Boehner's idea of breaking up the bills into smaller parts. I hope he sticks too that. It would be better that military spending bills only contain military spending and not buy offs to every states.

 

84 chemjeff - the earmarking process was built to reduce corruption by being transparent. Getting rid of the process sends the wrong message. Your focusing on how Murtha abused the system; what you don't get is that the only way we know about Murtha's abuses is because of the earmarking process - back in the good old days there were no forms, no committee staff or agency review, no databases, shit just happened.

85 one less tool used to buy off reluctant votes for huge spending bills. No, now your confusing the pork (Cornhusker Kickback, Louisiana Purchase) in the sausage making process with earmarks. Two completely different things. The leadership can't "ban" a "Cornhusker Kickback" ahead of time; next time is will be some obscure time extension on capitalization of assets or process waiver. Earmarks are a process open to every member.

86 in terms of Loser Lisa's status in the Senate, assuming Miller is unsuccessful,

regardless if  Miller is unsuccessful, strip Lisa of her Senate Republican committee memberships.

It isn't as if there aren't elected Republican Senators ready in waiting. It's a matter of necessity as well as of principle.  Membership within the Congressional Republican Caucus requires winning the Republican Party Campaigns, particularly strict enforcement in assigned Republican Committee Memberships.

"And what are the Republican Principles?" being the trillions of dollars question.

I've said it all along: substantiate the Republican Platform. Demand that Republican officials align to perform according to that platform.

Republican Platform? Yes, that definition is being determined through the Tea Party battles against progressive elitist establishment RINO bipartisanship with Socialism.

Constitutional Conservancy, all government officials are already sworn to obey, sustain and defend the US Constitution.

Similar to Ben's assessment above, if you can't take a symbolic stand and win, what are you?

87
O/T

Motor Trend editor up on Varney to defend car of the year Volt in two minutes.  Impossible task!

88 Forget Joe Miller in 2014.   His negatives will never improve by then.   Take a look at the current AK Attorney General Dan Sullivan.  He's a far better candidate. Even though he's relatively new to the state, he's married to an AK native.

89 No, now your confusing the pork (Cornhusker Kickback, Louisiana Purchase) in the sausage making process with earmarks.

Which showcases that earmarks are not effective in stopping corruption, and that transparency is possible without them, since we know about both those horrible things. 

Pork and earmarks are both wasteful, they should both be eliminated.  Earmarks are the easier thing to eliminate, and with a pork-loving president and senate, are much more realistic to get rid of before 2012.

90 @86
regardless if  Miller is unsuccessful, strip Lisa of her Senate Republican committee memberships.

Well, if Miller is successful, Lisa is out of the Senate so the point is moot. 

But Alaskans still need to fix their corruptible primary and general election processes. 

91 The Earmark issue is a complete red herring, it is disappointing that the conservative blogs have taken the hook so deeply.

Earmarks are a small issue. I believe if you take care of the small issues, the larger ones become easier to deal with later.

92 Are some people still arguing that because earmarks don't matter in the overall scheme of things, dollar-wise, they should just be left alone? Jeez, they seem more invested in earmarks than the politicians themselves...

93  

I liked Boehner's idea of breaking up the bills into smaller parts. I hope he sticks too that. It would be better that military spending bills only contain military spending and not buy offs to every states.

Criminalize incongruent insertions to the legislative process of a bill limited by topic. 

94 I don't care. Drag it out as long as possible. I'm beyond giving a crap anymore about perceptions and feelings.

95 Murky has an insurmountable snatch.

96 Jean, I'm not talking about the corrupting influence of the earmark process,I'm talking about the corrupting influence of the earmark itself.  It's an inducement for people and institutions to solicit/bribe their Congresscritters to get some of that sweet sweet guvmint gravy.

97 Plus - a big reason we are in the mess we're in is because of the general culture of spending in Washington, that it's okay to just spend like there's no tomorrow because for them the bill never comes due.  That has to end and the earmark debate is the first shot in that culture change.

98 Jean, dear, would you like some earmarks?  They're baked fresh this morning!  They go great with a little bit of "powdered sugar" (teehee!)

99 I thought Murkowski's write in campaign was a farce, but the childish antics from Miller's side make her look good by comparison.

What the hell is going on in Alaska that someone can lose the primary and still win the general election?  Was Miller's candidacy merely the result of Alaskans ignoring the primary and waiting to vote in the general?  Or did something happen after the primary that destroyed Miller's credibility as a candidate?

100

What the hell is going on in Alaska that someone can lose the primary and still win the general election?  Was Miller's candidacy merely the result of Alaskans ignoring the primary and waiting to vote in the general?  Or did something happen after the primary that destroyed Miller's credibility as a candidate?

Vote fraud happens everywhere, it happens massively, and it always, always favors the more liberal candidate by a long shot.

In Alaska, the machine is Republican.  So, you get entrenched Republicans who want to keep the pork rolling in from a candidate who is under their thumb, and you wed it to a huge push from liberal agitators and unions (but I repeat myself), and you get Murko

101 Miller should go totally Khan on this. Giving up for the good of this or the good of that is just what the Dems, RINOs, DIABLOs, and GOP Old Farts want you to do.

102 chemjeff - the influence is mitigated by the transparency - you can track these things on the web. You want to reduce spending: 1) Smaller, more detailed budget bills; 2) Quarterly appropriations, troop lead the bureaucrats; 3) Sunset provisions on everything; 4) Reduce taxes and keep a tight debt limit, make the pie smaller; 5) Attack the mission creep by writing good legislation; 6) Start zero funding program lines; and my idea - give each congresscritter some "reverse earmarks", appropriations strikes administered like earmarks (constituent forms, comment and prioritization, an open database, etc.)

103

"Or did something happen after the primary that destroyed Miller's credibility as a candidate?"

Paul the Psychic Octopus died right before the election.  I don't know what my point is.  Perhaps it's that I suspect Lisza was birthed in the sea by some kind of octopus-mutant.

104

It's been a bad year for Elmo (Elmendorf).  A C-17 went down in the summer, and now (apparently), we've lost an F-22.  Heads will roll. 

105 #103 Jean for Congress!

106 It's been a bad year for Elmo (Elmendorf). A C-17 went down in the summer, and now (apparently), we've lost an F-22. Heads will roll. Posted by: Big Fat Meanie at November 17, 2010 10:18 AM (8lCJT) We have so few F-22s and since Obama shit canned the line, we can't afford to lose any or it's pilot

107 Jean, given your overview of earmarks, the Republican leadership in Congress would be mounting another meaningless battle, their forte in politics.  Earmark = distraction?

108 Posted by: Free Government Cheese! at November 17, 2010 10:03 AM (VXBR1)

With a few grams of blow I am sure you could mount that.

109 Joanie, that's an incredibly dumb comment. I really enjoyed it.  

110 Jean, the first step in implementing your ideas in 103 is to stop dead what we do now. The Republic won't die if earmarks are gone before we find a better way.

111 So the Bridge to Nowhere was okay because it was transparent? Bullshit.

112 Mallamutt - of course that could be done, but that isn't how the process works. Which agency would implement those earmarks, you would have to have 2 budget and 2 appropriation bills for each item - the system is too big to do that for a culvert. Currently, an agency dreams up a budget based on some bottoms-up estimate of needs and a bunch of smoke and mirrors, the budget committees allocate the total spending based on these estimates, then the appropriations committees spend the cash. Earmarks are within those budgets and appropriation caps. If you want to cut - you need to push the agency caps down; either by zeroing lines, reducing missions, or making the whole pie smaller. If the Congress doesn't say - put culvert here, then the GS14s are going to put it where they want, and they will spend it all because if they don't, they lose it and then they get less next year.

113 Joanie (Oven Gloves)

Last April 8th for 18 minutes, the US cyber networks (Congress, govt, military as well as business) were redirected through China servers hosted across the sea.

114 Is the GOP going to restore the F-22, reverse Ebola's crime? We should have 500 of those planes. There is plenty of Federal bloat that can pay for them. Education, Energy, HUD, etc.

115

"Joanie, that's an incredibly dumb comment. I really enjoyed it."

Thanks, comatus. Incredibly Dumb is my middle name.

116 O/T

Commercial from the future:

Sasha:  Momma, have you ever had that 'less than fresh' feeling?

Mommy:  Yes, I have.  [wavy lines for a flashback montage] http://bit.ly/cBAklI

117 KG, somebody in Alaska wanted it, that town pushed for it - whether it should have been a high priority coming out of Stevens office is a question for the alaska voters. Trust me, the DoT GS'er had a chance to kibosh that deal, the committee staff had a chance to kill it, and no one did, I'm betting they had a nice package of stats and rationale for that bridge backing it up. Is the decision any worse then the huge amounts spent without earmarks to change streetsigns because some studies says seniors find upper/lower case signs easier to read?

118

"Last April 8th for 18 minutes, the US cyber networks (Congress, govt, military as well as business) were redirected through China servers hosted across the sea."

One day people won't punch me in the face when I talk about Squid People, who are really good at science and math. 

119 I don't like Miller losing, but this stinks of sore loser.  It is as if he were a Democrat or something.  I'm not an Alaskan, so I only get to pay for her earmarks, but let it go this time, already.  There will be other elections.

Posted by: MarkD

 

No, there won't. That's exactly the reason madcowski fought on. That's why Crist and Castle did what they did. Losing a Senate primary is, or should be, a death sentence, unless you're a zombie princess. Look at Rossi. People here went from "go man go" to "people are tired of him". People started that second line and kept it up throughout the primary AND the election regarding O'Donnell.

If Miller doesn't win here, he's done. You think that the local GOP will support him? You think that the Zombie princes will suddenly get all warm and sloppy? That the NRSC will magically get its collective head out of the up and locked position? They just put Cornyn back in after the mulitple screw ups we had this year. They learned nothing.

 

120 113, That is the heart of the problem. Congress is designed to fund a tiny Federal Government. Push these bills back to the States where they belong. The mangling of the Commerce Clause is at work here.

121 eman - The Republic won't die if earmarks are gone before we find a better way. I'm not saying they are critical, I'm saying they are a red herring and I hope the conservative movement isn't going to use an earmark decision to baseline this Congress. I think the insiders think they can mollify the tea party with it, and not make the hard cuts.

122

it seems that alaskans got cold feet, afraid that their own little bit of socialism might be taken away.

But isn't that the real fight we are in here, to get the public to understand that they are better off without a government handout than with one?

win some, lose some, the battle goes on... maybe we'll get this one next time.

 

123 All the top 10 states that eat more pork are Red States http://taxprof.typepad.com/taxprof_blog/2004/09/red_states_feed.html Red states LOVE pork and all prok products

124 115 Is the GOP going to restore the F-22, reverse Ebola's crime?

We should have 500 of those planes.

Agreed.  We should have never shut the Raptor production line down and put all our eggs in one basket with the F-35 JSF.  Especially when the RAND comparation wargamed the F-35 and found that they could be defeated by Sukhoi Su-35 fighters.

125 doh! sockpuppet

126 123, Well, the TEA Party is being tested, too. It is not a bad red herring if it reveals who is real and who is fake, who is weak and who is strong.

127 ...GS14s are going to put it where they want, and they will spend it all because if they don't, they lose it and then they get less next year.

Posted by: Jean at November 17, 2010 10:25 AM (judfL)

True enough.  I contend that if we really want more responsible spending on the front lines, it will have to be incentivized.  The ranking bureaucrat pukes in charge of doling out the cash should, in my opinion, have their pay cut, with the compensation being that they get to keep a share of whatever savings they are able to generate without degrading the core outputs required of their area of responsibility.  Thus, if they can save some bucks on something, rather than fear "losing" that money next year, they will greedily divert a share of it into their own pocket.  Granted - they'll rarely make all the savings at once, since they will want to save up more for the next year when they want to take a vacation to Aruba, but it would get them thinking the right way.

On the stick end of things, I would love to see a powerful inspector-general type post that was in charge of roaming around looking for fraud and waste, doling out punishment wherever said waste or abuse was found.  Put the fear in the bureaucrats, and keep them honest.

128

#126

it all makes perfect sense, if you want us to lose.

129 mallamutt - Abramoff wasn't getting paid for small earmarks, he was getting paid to make substantive changes in bills that effected whole industries. If an individual congresscritter wants to abuse the process, they can, vote them out - but don't think that without the process they can't make their friends happy.

130 A museum dedicated to the Teapot, a tribute theme park to Dolly Parton and an art installation that consisted of placing ratty looking mannequins on park benches, trees and bridges are three of my favorite expenditures of Gov't money here in purple NC (some State, some Fed., so not classic earmarks).
If we can't get serious about cutting that piddly crap, who the hell is going to listen to us when we want to fix Social Security? Nobody.

131 Reactionary - having the GAO and agency IG's report directly to a multi-year, ensconced Special Prosecutor has been proposed and shot down.

132 Mallamutt @ 97

The adulterated precedence establishing "how things work" aligns against the original legislative process.

133 Alaska loves Tons. Of. Fuckin. Sequins.

134 Reactionary - having the GAO and agency IG's report directly to a multi-year, ensconced Special Prosecutor has been proposed and shot down.

Posted by: Jean at November 17, 2010 10:40 AM (Ja6pC)

Hmm...  Perhaps they were afraid that prosecuting so many criminals in the bureaucracy would shut down the legal system and leave too many government posts open.  If it were up to me there would be a special court for corruption cases - one operating 24-7 with a guillotine ready out back.

135

Ok, here's the stupid question of the day.  Off topic but here goes.

If Obam and  Biden die does Nancy Pelosi become President since she is the current speaker of the house, even though she lost the majority in the last election?

And, does she have to give up the Presidency when Boehner takes over as speaker in January and does he become President, or does Nancy get to keep the job?

136 Kratos
Agreed.  We should have never shut the Raptor production line down and put all our eggs in one basket with the F-35 JSF. 

As things are now, NOTHING stays in production. Every project gets aborted prior to completion. There is no cohesively organized armament of aircraft, weapons, AND PARTS FOR REPAIRS.

And forcing the US Military to rely on foreign made components is a major malfunction to national sovereignty and defense.

137 Lincolntf - its a democracy, vote the fuckers out. Do you want a meritocracy run by the best ivy league beaucrats who can navigate the Federal hiring process? Who asked for that shit - I'm going to bet it was local governments in NC.

138 Jaimo - Yes, and No - she is it with Inouye next in line.

139 I eschew Tons. Of. Fuckin. Sequins.

140 Jamio - but, Nancy as President would be great - after all she banned earmarks last year in the House, what a visionary she is ...

141 Yea - that was kind of my point. -Mallamutt

You don't need agreement phrased: "you're right".

142 If Miller wants to challenge anything in court, he should challenge the legitimacy of Murkowski's run itself. I might be mistaken here, so somebody correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't this write-in campaign of hers okayed by the Alaskan Courts after the start of the campaign season, tailored specifically to give her a chance to retain her seat? If I'm right, how could that possibly hold up in federal court?

143 And forcing the US Military to rely on foreign made components is a major malfunction to national sovereignty and defense.

Posted by: maverick muse at November 17, 2010 10:45 AM (H+LJc)

Amen.  Especially given that we've had real-life examples of companies cutting off supplies of parts when their government dislikes our policies.  I have no problem with a foreign company owning the productive assets, so long as they are here in the US, and easily nationalized if needed. 

144 So Nancy would be President for the next 2 years if this happened before the new Congress in January?  Wow

145 Jean, I'm aware that we live in a type of democracy.
The point of my post is that if conservatives/Republicans/Tea Partiers, etc. fold early and often on garbage like this then they are either unwilling or unable to do the big things.
As for purely Fed earmarks, we have multiple temples in honor of Jesse Helms.

146 So Nancy would be President for the next 2 years if this happened before the new Congress in January?  Wow

Posted by: Jaimo at November 17, 2010 10:51 AM (9U1OG)

One almost feels motivated to pray for Biden's good health for a couple months.  Almost. 

147 And forcing the US Military to rely on foreign made components is a major malfunction to national sovereignty and defense.

Posted by: maverick muse at November 17, 2010 10:45 AM (H+LJc)

For the Dems, that's a feature, not a bug.

148

Ok, then.  It was a discussion we were having at work and we couldn't find info anywhere on the subject.  I knew the Morons/Moronettes would have info. 

149 The real problem won't be a parts cut-off by foreign suppliers; it will be the delays due to the current economic and credit crunch. Distributors are not maintaining stock of anything but the most common, basic components. Try and order something with an extended temperature range or EMI/RFI filter and be prepared to see 20+ week delivery times on $5 parts.

150 24 When Palin was Governor a bunch of the corrupt Republicans were exposed for what they were and many of them ended up behind bars. After this election it is obvious that she didn't get them all.

I would say that you have a gift for understatement.  Being that we all just watched Big Frank (the bagman) Murkooski, Chairman and CEO of the Corrupt Bastards Club, buy an election for his cokehead daughter right out in broad daylight with no fear of retribution or consequence. 

This election is just further proof (as if any were needed) that Alaska is just a public housing project with better scenery.  Obviously most of the "rugged frontiersmen" just lie around channel surfing and cashing gub-ment checks.  That's tough to beat with complicated ideas such as getting a job.   

If Gov. Palin and her allies couldn't fix it; then, it isn't going to get fixed.  At least, not in our lifetimes. 

Never entrust power to anyone not willing to surrender it.  

151 So Nancy would be President for the next 2 years if this happened before the new Congress in January? Wow next 4, I believe.

152 Earmarks are not a little thing.  Martin Gross put out a book in 2000 called Government Racket.  Page after page after page of earmarks, to the tune of something like 350 billion dollars a year.  He has a new book out now and says things have gotten worse.

153 Wait, what if President Nancy doesn't make it to 2013?

154 160 Wait, what if President Nancy doesn't make it to 2013?

Vice President Moonbeam Brown will take over.

/Horrifying to think about potential VP candidates Nancy would pick.

155 150
So Nancy would be President for the next 2 years if this happened before the new Congress in January?  Wow
Posted by: Jaimo at November 17, 2010 10:51 AM (9U1OG)

She would become President during these next seven to eight weeks ONLY if both Obama AND Biden were incapacitated or removed from office - in either order (i.e., O then B, or B then O) - AND neither Obama nor Biden had appointed a new Vice President who had then been approved by both houses of Congress.

156 Martin Gross is misusing the term earmark - the earmarks they are banning are the process one used in the spending bills. They can ban those because they are managed and defined. The general pork, the bulk of that number, are not managed and defined - and thus can't be banned by fiat. Now if the House and Senate leadership said each bill will stand for 10 days of public comment, and the leadership would strike pork from the conference reports - we might be getting somewhere.

157

Posted by: Kratos (Ghost of Sparta) at November 17, 2010 11:02 AM (9hSKh)

Posted by: Mallamutt at November 17, 2010 11:02 AM (OWjjx)

 

Thanks.  These are all horrifying thoughts.

158 163
Posted by: ya2daup at November 17, 2010 11:03 AM (yRrAd)

Her term as President would run until January 20, 2013. She could run for re-election - once - and serve until January 20, 2017 if she won. She could not run for re-election a second time because she would have served for more than one-half of a presidential term (i.e., two years + some number of days).

159 Lincolntf - its a democracy, vote the fuckers out

How exactly do people in the lower 48 states vote out Murkowski?  Her state sure as hell isn't going to do it - they love the perks.

I suppose we could target Jim DeMint or Scott Brown because they voted for a defense bill which Murkowski attached an earmark to, but that seems self-defeating.  It would be much better if the representatives of the lower 48 states could outlaw the process of attaching earmarks.

160 Bevel - I was referring to the Dolly Parton museums and Jessy Helm's shrines.

161 Bevel - I was referring to the Dolly Parton museums and Jessy Helm's shrines.

My point is that I can elect the most level guy in the country, and that will count for nothing if graft-seeking mafia states like Alaska vote in people like Murkowski who engage in earmarking for stupid projects. 

Earmarkers won't be stopped by people in their home state.  People in other states have to stop them.

162 84 chemjeff - the earmarking process was built to reduce corruption by being transparent. Getting rid of the process sends the wrong message. Your focusing on how Murtha abused the system; what you don't get is that the only way we know about Murtha's abuses is because of the earmarking process - back in the good old days there were no forms, no committee staff or agency review, no databases, shit just happened.

Posted by: Jean at November 17, 2010 09:45 AM (7Jipo)

85 ... No, now your confusing the pork (Cornhusker Kickback, Louisiana Purchase) in the sausage making process with earmarks. Two completely different things....

Posted by: Jean at November 17, 2010 09:50 AM (lnUW/)

These are contradictory.  Basically, earmarks stopped nothing.  The CK and LP were done by the old corrupt system.  The system of earmarking didn't stop that.  It didn't work as planned.

So, whatever merits earmarking had for bringing sunlight to the system, it failed and just put another parallel system in place for graft.

163 Bevel - the easier path is to reduce total pie. Fighting a thousand spending battles is not a good strategy. All of the real reductions would come from fighting programs with large constituencies and entrenched bureaucracies. Our newly minted, freshman 'Pub with a staff of a few college kids will have to face an army of government experts, lobbyists, and external interest groups to get the cut on the table in committee, then convince his fellow 'Pubs to cut (including the Chair, who is likely not a fiscal conservative), then hope the measure survives conference with the Senate and a veto. We need to reduce the funds available at the top level, by lowering taxes and fighting an intense rear guard action on the debt limit. Those are battles that can be won. Reduce the whole pie and make those entrenched beaucracies and constituencies fight each other.

164 AmishDude - the earmark process wasn't put in place to eliminate graft. It was put in place to exercise some political control over the bureaucracy, and spread that control to all Congresscritters - not just those on the Appropriations committees. It was never intended, nor could it, effect pork and bribery in other Committees.

165 Alaska Update: Murky Claims She Has Insurmountable Lead

 

translation: surrender Dorothy

166 Posted by: Jean at November 17, 2010 11:45 AM (lnUW/)

You are laboring under the misconception that this is an either-or thing.  Earmarks are a slam-dunk to cut, a good first step that the government is cutting down on stupidity.  Obama already said he is receptive to getting rid of them.  Reducing pork is the harder battle that still needs to be fought.

How can Republicans talk about fiscal discipline when guys like Ron Paul are grabbing millions for stupid shit through earmarks?

167 Jean, so are you or aren't you for eliminating earmarks as a first step? I suppose you are arguing that we should take a pass on this and just wait for the real shit to get done?

168

I loved what Miller stood for the first time I heard him speak. To me there was such a stark difference between him and Lisa that I thought it would be a no brainer to Alaskans and their supposed "independant spirit".

From the start you could tell Lisa was confident she had it ini the bag. Miller was aggresive and Lisa's campaign just seem lackluster, taking it for granted that she would win the seat daddy gave her. She assumed her supporters would just go out and vote like zombies for her.

And her supporters had that same mindset. "She'll win, no reason to fret and go vote, someone else will do that for me and she'll win. I'm just gonna stay home."

I'd be curious to see what the voter turnout in the villages for the primary were. I bet it was damn near zero.

Well Miller wins the primary and shocks the hell out of Lisa and her league of porklovers. When Lisa decided to run a write in she new that her chances would be pretty damn good if she just got the village and pork votes. That's where she would pick up the numbers. Those are the ones that stayed home for the primary.

She ran a very effective campaign to get those votes while Joe was mired down in stupid shit that really shouldn't have mattered but was plastered all over the Alaska media. I hate to say it but Joe and his staff pretty much killed their own campaign.

I've been here for over 25 years and just now have a new loathing for my fellow Alaskans. I think I know what a conservative in California feels like right now.

Fuck em. Sideways, with a live porcupine.

Independant Alaskan spirit my ass. Fuckin posers.

 

169 Earmarks are often nothing more than bribes that push bad legislation through to passage.

170 Why does everyone use fake names on here?

171

"Why does everyone use fake names on here?"

You got me. Seems kinda silly.

172 11 I don't like Miller losing, but this stinks of sore loser.  It is as if he were a Democrat or something.  I'm not an Alaskan, so I only get to pay for her earmarks, but let it go this time, already.

We are so fucked with attitudes like this.

173 She likes wearin' lipstick, she likes French cuisine
but she won't let me use my passion unless it's in a limousine.

She got me under pressure,
she got me under pressure.

She likes the art museum, she don't like Pavlov's dog.
She fun at the mind museum, she likes it in a London fog.
She don't like other women, she likes whips and chains.
She likes cocaine and flippin' out with great Danes.
She's about all I can handle, it's too much for my brain.

174 Bevel - I think they are a meaningless red herring. Nancy stopped the process in the House, if the minority Senators want to try and stop it in the Senate, fine - but don't make such a big deal out of it. Your not cutting the budget, it's go nothing to do with bribery or passing legislation, and in the end a transparent process dies and the pork continues. Meanwhile, Conservatives think they have won a victory - yeah DeMint, yeah Boehner, yeah em ... Nancy, and nameless GS14 roll in their cubical aisles. Stop pretending this matters, hold their feet to fire on something real.

175

Someone needs to tell Miller that at some point, it stops being CPR and starts being necrophilia.  He's gone well beyond that point.

Sucks for him.

176 I have seen it all.  Now someone thinks Miller was dumped just for pork?

No, Miller was predictably revealed to be flawed, as the fashion did not match reality.  He was a contradiction, and far from a Conservative ideal - even rebuked for using governmental resources for his own political efforts.

Also, Murkowski, with a 70% ACU rating was not as bad as the fashion amongst us peddled.

I come from the school of WFB and Dr. Friedman.

It is growing harder to see so many fine Conservatives follow a fashionable offering.  Identity - Image movements are weak and are simply not conservative.

Delaware was a fiasco, just as foolish as running McCain in the last General Election.  Alaska too, was so poorly handled - nothing wrong with inspiring more sound Conservative Candidates, but you must properly vet the offering, be honest, objective, and always run a constructive effort.  I wrote to many during that primary warning of foolishly turning Murkowski into the 'enemy'.

Anyhow, today we see more fashion, even as the Palin Franchise and the Tea Party Express (I mean the Express not the Tea Party Protests I participated in), proved utterly destructive in those last Midterms - fashionable weakness enabling the Democrats - some are more obsessed with Bristol Palin dancing than anything else.

TAXes going to be raised?  Nope, they are only focused on Bristol on a show about Celebrity Dancing.

It isn't conservative, and even after the embarrassments of Alaska and others, you would think some would get a little bit more reasoned about the Celebrity fan fare, which is so overtly hyped.

We better get it together, because we cannot continue to enable the Democratic Partisan disaster anymore.

177 PS: isn't it ironic, Miller has been reduced to games often played by Democrats, which he once blasted in the Primaries? 

Lawsuits?

Not so impressive at all.

178 Loyality!

179 Stop pretending this matters, hold their feet to fire on something real.

Posted by: Jean at November 17, 2010 01:13 PM (wgkZv)

People have already showcased numerous examples in this thread of how earmark spending is wasteful, how 'transparency' hasn't stopped it, and how it didn't stop pork being introduced into bills.  It's bad, and the government needs to take steps to say it's going to stop misbehaving with its spending.  Much of the uncertainty in the country is because the government is continuing its profligacy.

Again, you seem to believe this is an either-or strategy, and that if we get rid of earmarks we aren't getting rid of anything else.

180 Bevel - the earmarking process wasn't about fighting pork or reducing waste - have you even looked up what the earmarking process they are banning is? And, yes I am concerned this is going to be an either-or strategy - other then earmark ban and Obamacare repeal, what other spending controls have you heard the Republican Senate leadership talk about; any official endorsement of Paul Ryan's roadmap; any other specific procedural measures to control spending? All I see is handwaving from the leadership, maybe they are keeping their powder dry until after the lame-duck session, but I see this big media push on a minor issue as an ill omen. Remember, it's so inconsequential that Nancy Pelosi shut down the process, this isn't even a fight and everyone is patting themselves on the back because Mitch flipped.

181 By my reckoning we put up with Kay BAILOUT, Ciro, Henry, Charlie and Sheila for too many years. What's AK got Murky-needs-deloused-ski?

BFD

Wanna trade?

182

Posted by: Kingfisher from Funny River at November 17, 2010 08:58 AM (lwNXw)

In an e-mail I received from Joe this morning:

Lisa Murkowski and her friends in the media has misled you.  They want you to believe that Joe has lost this election.  Below, we dismantle 5 common myths going around:

MYTH 1: Joe Miller is forcing the state of Alaska to count ballots.

Lisa Murkowski is forcing the count in Alaska – by ignoring the primary process (after
promising to stand by the results) and conducting a write-in campaign costing millions of dollars, Lisa ensured a drawn-out counting process would be
required to determine a victor.

MYTH 2: Lisa Murkowski is
beating Joe Miller

After 7 days of write-in ballot
counting, Republican nominee Joe Miller still leads incumbent Lisa Murkowski in the uncontested write-in ballot count. As of Monday night, nearly all
write-in votes have been counted.  Joe Miller has 90,448 uncontested votes and Murkowski only has 84.563. If current trends hold, Miller and
Murkowski will likely end up in a dead heat in the uncontested ballot count.

MYTH 3: Joe Miller is indiscriminately throwing out ballots

By law, Alaska statute mandates that the candidates name be spelled correctly. Joe Miller is challenging ballots based on that statute. As a strong believer in the rule of law and constitutional values, Joe believes in this high standard of proof required for write-in ballots to be considered.

Given that the counting process alone has cost the state significant time and resources, a strict interpretation of ballots is necessary to ensure election results are determined in a fair and timely manner. This is crucial for Alaskans to receive proper congressional representation.

MYTH 4: The law leaves it up to ballot counters to determine what ballots are legitimate

Lisa MurkowskiÂ’s campaign has spent considerable funds attempting to ensure that
her name is properly spelled on the write-in ballots, proving that she anticipated and prepared for a strict interpretation of law.  The law
allows no room for personal interpretation.  You spell it correctly, or you donÂ’t.

MYTH 5: There are no reports of fraud or voting irregularities

The Joe Miller campaign has documented numerous instances of voting irregularities.

While nothing can be done about these cases now that the election has already been held, the Joe Miller campaign believes that these cases prove why it is all the more necessary to ensure that there is strict interpretation on the ballot counting process.

Posted by: Kingfisher from Funny River at November 17, 2010 08:58 AM (lwNXw)

Thank you very much Kingfisher. I had a feeling there was more a foot than counting writeins.

183 <a href="http://www.onlineusb.net">wholesale usb </a>Let us always meet each other with a smile,for the smile is the beginning of love,<a href="http://www.usb-disk.com">wholesale usb flash drives</a>and once we begin to love each other naturally we want to do something.
<a href="http://www.topusbdrive.com">Branded usb drive </a>

184 Slot1 flash card R4 ¨¨ una flash card DS porta. porta S1 ha le caratteristiche della scheda flash mainstream: nessuna macchina pennello, built-in funzione di guida, possono portare flash card GBA e la fine del supporto dinamico patch giocando funzione CleanROM ¨¨ facile da usare.
Come un flash card precoce, R4 standard massimo sostegno da 4 GB TF card. Standard non supporta SDHC TF, questo ¨¨ dispiaciuto. Tuttavia, un ampio gruppo di utenti R4, sono le risorse pi¨´ rilevanti. Archivio gioco R4 ¨¨ memorizzato direttamente alla carta di TF, eliminando i passaggi manuali di archivio di backup Arresto. R4 ¨¨ un archivio di. 512k ¨¨ il file Sav.
R4 per homebrew, patch DLDI pu¨° automaticamente giocare, e integrato nel software kernel Moonshell multimediali, al fine di realizzare il film, ascoltare musica e delle funzioni di lettura e-book.
<a href="http://www.scheda-r4.com/">R4i SDHC</a>
<a href="http://www.scheda-r4.com/">ds Nintendo</a>
<a href="http://www.scheda-r4.com/">M3 ds real</a>
<a href="http://www.scheda-r4.com/">micro sd</a>