First-term Republican Rep. Dave Reichert refused to be interviewed by MSNBC.com for their piece highlighting the tight race for WA’s 8th Congressional District. But state Senator Pam Roach (R-19th Century) was not so shy in going on the record to criticize Democratic challenger Darcy Burner:
“I got her mailer, with the photo of her and her son,” said Republican Pam Roach, a 16-year veteran of the state senate and a Reichert supporter, whose legislative district overlaps part of the southern portion of the congressional district. “My reaction was: “If you’re elected, when are you going to spend time with your child?’ She has one baby; will she have two or three more?” People in the district, Roach said, demand full-time representation.
“My reaction was “why don’t you just take care of your child and grow up a bit and then think about running for office?'”
Yeah, um… because having a political career is exactly the type of maternal neglect that could lead your child to grow up to be a drug dealer or something.
The spectacle of Pam Roach offering anybody child rearing tips is ironic enough, but I wonder if Roach has offered the same sage, Victorian advice to incumbent Republican Rep. Cathy McMorris in WA’s 5th Congressional District?
After all, if Roach is implying that women of childbearing age shouldn’t server in Congress, it is the recently married, fundamentalist Christian, anti-birth-control, 35-year-old McMorris who is way more likely to be popping out babies over the next few sessions. On the other hand, demographic trends strongly suggest that the pro-choice, feminist Burner, with a single child after 13 years of marriage, is exactly the type of woman who tends to stop at one.
So I guess we should be expecting Roach to announce her endorsement of Peter Goldmark any day now, right?
Vote for Goldmark to stop the madness! All these childbearing women in Congress should stay home in the kitchen! Men can feel free to abandon their children but women must not!
Reichert is really in trouble if he is relying on Pam “Who took my flowers?” Roach to help him out.
This is 2006 and not 1806, right?
I hear Henry is just grateful he’s only neglected instead of aborted.
I wonder where Janet S is right now? Let’s hear your endorsement for Goldmark Janet.
3 “This is 2006 and not 1806, right?”
Until the neocons turn it into 1306.
Goldy, so what’s the point? Eastern Washington is full of double standard politicians. Hastings, Roach and West just to name a few.
I remember Steve Largent talking about his first term in Congress. He said the hours were so long, he just about had to fax Daddy’s face back home every night because he never got to see his family and he wanted his children to remember what he looked like. I hate to think what Pam Roach or Janet would think about that.
Here’s a great word from dictionary.com to describe the trolls who post here:
pervicacious \puhr-vih-KAY-shuhs\, adjective:
Refusing to change one’s ideas, behavior, etc.; stubborn; obstinate.
An example of its use:
Despite the heavy raindrops ricocheting off her overstuffed hips, PROUDASS pervivaciously insisted that the skies were blue and that she could see the flowering of Iraqi democracy in the distance.
PL @ 9:
You nailed that one perfectly.
It’s sort of like believing that there will be no safe harbors for terrorists, then Pakistan negotiates a deal to let Osama bin Laden live freely in “rebel” controlled area’s of northern Pakistan.
Isn’t odd to anyone else that a nation armed with nuclear weapons and a modern military cannot subdue “tribesman” living in fucking caves???
It’s more like the Pakistani’s WILL NOT pursue bin Laden and WILL NOT allow George W. Bush to finish the fight with Al Qaeda.
Now who’s really in charge of US military forces? Bush or Musharraf?
Yep, that Bush is really keeping us safe. NOT!
@ 9 Same applies for moonbats
It would be nice if the example given actually fit the situation here rather than make yet another personal attack.
So, ProudAss supports Roach’s opinion that women of childbearing age should stay home. Wow!
I don’t care how darcy decides to raise her children. Never have. I just resent Joni Balter and others calling her super-mom because she hires someone else to raise her child. No, that makes her rich and bored with motherhood, not a supermom. If she wants to hand over one of the most rewarding jobs in life to the hired help, that is her right. But don’t ask me to praise her for it.
Why the cheap shots at McMorris, except for gratuitous points? She has made choices in her life, and has come to the mature realization that politics is a full time job. Too bad darcy doesn’t have the same respect for family.
Why the cheap shots at McMorris, except for gratuitous points?
What cheap shot(s)?
Jack Burton @ 11
I agree that unwarranted personal attacks should be avoided if possible. Sometimes, however, some of the folks who post here are so disagreeable and humorless, and so disinclined to actually engage in rational discourse, that communicating with them is impossible. In such situations, a little personal attack seems entirely appropriate. Have you read what PRODASS has been posting today on the previous thread? Read that and tell me you’d treat such an individual with respect.
13 – Janet, you’ve lost track of the talking points you’ve pasted here since the first day Goldy started writing about Darcy Burner almost all of which has put down Burner for her motherhood choices.
But maybe you’re telling the truth. You don’t care because copying and pasting RNC and WSGOP talking points is just a job for you. Somebody has to do it.
You probably vote straight Dem for all we know. If that’s the case, thank you for the support.
that makes her rich and bored with motherhood,
Pam Roach are you listening?
Too bad darcy doesn’t have the same respect for family.
And neither does Pam apparently.
IF you could see only one film concerning the war on terror, that film should be United 93, which is screening in cinemas. Monday is the fifth anniversary of the terror attacks on September 11 in New York, on the Pentagon and in Pennsylvania. The film is a magnificent re-creation of the events on United Flight 93, the only one of the four hijacked planes that did not hit the terrorists’ target. [………………………………………………………………“Attention: Sit down, everyone! The Muuuuuuuuuslims promised us they will land the plane safely if we are nice to them. We need to trust them! They have human rights and we must not offend their believes! We need to chant, “BUSH NO GOOD! BUSH NO GOOD!” [Democrat Carl Grossman] ]
Carl, what is the Hebrew word for the Jews that helped guard the other Jew “internees” for the Germans? For being traitors to their fellow Jews, they were given food and special privileges by the Nazis. Thanks in advance. JCH
TJ – I don’t see where McMorris is married or has children. So why bring her into this, except to remind everyone that Goldmark is male and she isn’t? Isn’t that a bit sexist?
Darcy has a real live baby that she has no intention of paying attention to. I’m not sure how that is an appealing feature to the women in the 8th, but who knows.
I don’t see where McMorris is married or has children. So why bring her into this
From Goldy’s post:
After all, if Roach is implying that women of childbearing age shouldn’t server in Congress, it is the recently married, fundamentalist Christian, anti-birth-control, 35-year-old McMorris who is way more likely to be popping out babies over the next few sessions.
One possibility for why Goldy “brought her into this” is as a contrast to Burner, not Goldmark, thereby illustrating Roach’s hypocrisy. Maybe it’s just me, but, as that is the point of the post, it seems to me to be the most likely explanation.
Crap. Let’s try that again:
I don’t see where McMorris is married or has children. So why bring her into this
From Goldy’s post:
After all, if Roach is implying that women of childbearing age shouldn’t server in Congress, it is the recently married, fundamentalist Christian, anti-birth-control, 35-year-old McMorris who is way more likely to be popping out babies over the next few sessions.
One possibility for why Goldy “brought her into this” is as a contrast to Burner, not Goldmark, thereby illustrating Roach’s hypocrisy. Maybe it’s just me, but, as that is the point of the post, it seems to me to be the most likely explanation.
Clueless – Roach is a local politician. I don’t know how old her children were when she got involved in politics, but the state level is a totally different scenario than national politics. Our state legislature is part time, those elected usually have regular jobs.
Running at the national level is a full time job plus, leaving no time for family.
One small question about Dracy Burner not being a fit parent because she is running for congress. Speaking as a single father who raised two children without any help from thier mother at all. Has anybody thought that Mr Burner mite be able to raise and care for children when thier mother is away?
WASHINGTON – A furious Bill Clinton is warning ABC that its mini-series ”The Path to 9/11” grossly misrepresents his pursuit of Osama bin Laden – and he is demanding the network ”pull the drama” if changes aren’t made. Clinton pointedly refuted several fictionalized scenes that he claims insinuate he was too distracted by the Monica Lewinsky sex scandal to care about bin Laden and that a top adviser pulled the plug on CIA operatives
Go talk to Michael Moore. Maybe he can help you, “Bubba”. Maybe he can make the movie you want to see, that blames George W Bush and gives you a total pass.
Then go talk to Dan Rather. Maybe he can come up with some “fake but accurate” documents that discredit GW.
Then go talk to Sandy Burgler. Maybe he can sneak into the national archives and stuff his pants full of damning documents.
Then go talk to Jamie Gorelick, who may be able to slant the 9/11 commission’s reports to completely exonerate you from any wrongdoing. At least, she will try.
Then go talk to Ron Brown, James McDougal, and Vince Foster.
Oh, wait…
Mr. Burner has a J O B… the gratefully UNABORTED Henry is a TODDLER.
Just think how much more CASH little darcy would have gotten from Code Pink if she could have bragged about aborting little HenryLeftbehind instead of birthing him.
On another note… has anyone noticed that the ditz in the green sweater that does the Vonage commercial looks an awful lot like sacrificial darcy?
ABC caved to pressure by the slurpee pres and his comrades.
And they wonder why we call them the ‘liberal media’.
COWARDS.
Camber Lybbert thought it was a mistake when her bank told her that her daughter’s Social Security number, issued by the U.S. government, was on their files for two credit cards and two auto loans, with an outstanding balance of more than $25,000. Her daughter is 3 years old. /break/ As it turned out, an illegal immigrant, Jose Tinoco, was using their daughter’s stolen Social Security number, not in pursuit of a financial crime, but in order to get a job. […………………………………………………………………….Multiply by 12 million and this turns into a total pig fuck; however, as long as illegals vote Democrat, anyone who questions this is “racist” and “hateful”. Democrats: turning the USA into a third world Hillary Village “Baja Norte”.]
Darcy can hand over motherhood responsibility to whoever she wants, including her husband. But her child is real, and she has made a decision not to be there for her son. Goldy claims that this is a badge of honor that she is a liberated woman who is not shackled to her baby. How this compares to a woman who has no children, but happens to be of child-bearing age, misses me somehow.
Big glen – I’m sorry to hear that your children had to grow up without their mother. It sounds like you are a responsible father, and the children are probably very happy and successful. But that doesn’t mean that it is preferable for children to grow up this way.
Janet, you did read the post, didn’t you?
I wonder if darcy knows what the gratefully UNABORTED little HenryLeftBehind had for lunch today?
Wasn’t Pam Roach the Senator (R-Inbred) who MAILED HERSELF ashes FROM HER OWN FIREPLACE during the paranoid Anthrax scare era? Just to get media attention?
Man, JCH Kennedy’s A.D.D. is really kicking in “big time” these days. To think he (supposedly) lives on a beautiful Hawaiian Island, yet sits in his basement feeding his OCD for hours at a time. Good thing somebody is still obsessed with Bill Clinton conspiracy theories, especially at a time when Bush’s approval rating is half of where Clinton was at near the end of his second term.
Everyone needs to watch this please
http://video.google.com/videop.....9658676035
A measure to limit greenhouse gas emissions in California could foster fresh interest among California companies looking outside the state for a less regulated business environment. The cap, designed to cut greenhouse gas output 25 percent by 2020, evoked stern responses from business advocates such as the California Chamber of Commerce, which said that the act would drive companies and jobs out of California and jack up power and fuel prices for California residents. [……………………Duh….You think??? Atlas has Shrugged. When the taxpayers leave, the Democrats [welfare hacks, illegals, “guvment employees, and union scum will need to tax each other. Parasites eating parasites!]
Your right, I don’t understand the post. Roach is talking about a real live child. That she made a stupid comment about darcy having more was just a silly aside. The main statement stands. Roach never said anything about the abstract issue of being of child-bearing age. That was 100% goldy:
“After all, if Roach is implying that women of childbearing age shouldn’t server in Congress . . .”
In any case, goldy just was looking for a reason to put Goldmark in the headline, for a little free campaigning. It was a cheap shot against McMorris. If that’s the best reason you have for Goldmark is that he isn’t a woman of child-bearing age, then good luck.
Im not a woman of child-bearing age ether.
Do I get a gold star?
JCH @ 32:
Sounds like you’re a taxpayer. Would you please be the first to leave.
America and all real patriotic Americans everywhere thank you in advance for leaving the country and going wherever it is Atlas has gone. You Fountainhead.
How soon before Goldy blogs about little Timmy’s initiative not making the ballot. Breaks your heart doesn’t it?
This is really quite an impressive paragraph to include both of these sentences:
That she made a stupid comment about darcy having more was just a silly aside… Roach never said anything about the abstract issue of being of child-bearing age.
How could she have more children if she is not of child-bearing age? Is it really unreasonable to suggest that if Roach herself brings up the possibility of more children as a negative her position is based on some underlying principle – like, for instance, married women of child-bearing age are a risk to constituents looking for full-time representation?
In any case, goldy just was looking for a reason to put Goldmark in the headline, for a little free campaigning.
And on a liberal Democratic blog, no less!
It was a cheap shot against McMorris.
We’ve already established that’s b.s.
If that’s the best reason you have for Goldmark is that he isn’t a woman of child-bearing age, then good luck.
Oh, the best reason is that he’s intelligent, experienced, and a damn good man. But if Pam Roach has problems with McMorris, let’s find out.
“I don’t belong to an organized political party. I’m a Democrat.” – Will Rogers.
Commentby Janet S— 9/7/06@ 2:57 pm
“In any case, goldy just was looking for a reason to put Goldmark in the headline, for a little free campaigning. It was a cheap shot against McMorris. If that’s the best reason you have for Goldmark is that he isn’t a woman of child-bearing age, then good luck.”
Actually, it was a cheap shot against Ms. Roach, who opened herself up for it by implying that Ms. Burner shouldn’t be a candidate at a time when she had a small child.
Although it was a pretty good way of getting Mr. Goldmark in the headline, the main thrust of the argument was exposing a certain hypocrisy on the part of a prominant local Republican (Ms. Roach). It’s not ok for Ms. Burner to be a mother and Congresswoman at the same time, but it is ok for Ms. McMorris.
Or, maybe Ms. Roach will surprise us all and be consistent. Maybe her statement was an actual voicing of a strongly held conviction, and she really will endorse Mr. Goldmark, or at least advise Ms. McMorris that she should also leave the race.
Of course, I could also wake up tomorrow morning and find that pigs have learned to fly, but I’m not going to count on it.
Hey B.M. guess what I watch a doc. last night that sead the Federal Income tax is Illegal . The I.R.S. can’t even produce the law to show you .
So you don’t have to pay Federal Income Tax any more .. I thought you might like to here that … I’ll try and find a link for you
I saw it from a doc. I downloaded of of usenet . It look pretty legit though …..
here you go B.M.
http://www.ahherald.com/bishop.....me_tax.htm
here is my google serch string if you want to serch it
Federal income tax illegal
Socialist:
That’s right. When you get those millions of dollars promised you by that nice man from Nigeria, you won’t be legally required to pay taxes on it.
…
I’m beginning to think Socialist is JCH’s split personality. They have only brain cell between them. Unfortunately, when one personality is using the brain cell, the other is posting here.
“I don’t belong to an organized political party. I’m a Democrat.” – Will Rogers.
Commentby The Socialist— 9/7/06@ 3:14 pm
Come now, Socialist. Don’t tease the Recruit. He may not be smart enough to know that it’s a joke, and he’s way too amusing to let him go off to jail.
Im sorry I wasn’t joking
Yes, according to We the People Foundation for Constitutional Education.
You can reach the Foundation at this website: http://WWW.GIVEMELIBERTY.ORG.
The nonprofit Foundation has been trying unsuccessfully for years to get answers from the President of the United States, the Speaker of the House of Representatives, the U.S. Senate Majority Leader on the legality of the 16th Amendment, which is the federal income tax.
In 1913, the United States Secretary of State, Philander Knox, “committed fraud” when he declared the 16th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution had been “legally ratified,” the People Foundation charges.
http://www.ahherald.com/bishop.....me_tax.htm
It looked legit to me
I’ll try and find the doc I watch on the web. I no most people have no idea what usenet news groups even are. And even if they did.
You have to have Win rar and quick par and a decent news server to really take advantige of it
But I wasn’t kidding
It only apllies to the income tax. The rest of the taxess are legal ..
So I would have to pay taxess on the Nigeria thing.
And yes I know that a studid e-mail scam that has been around forever…..
this is a different one then the one I watched but here are some clips I found
http://www.givemeliberty.org/wtp-tv/default.htm
Before telling the IRS to take a hike, you should probably do a bit more research.
From Wikipedia:
“Some tax protesters, conspiracy investigators, and others opposed to income taxes cite what they contend is evidence that the Sixteenth Amendment was never “properly ratified.” One argument is based on the contention that the legislatures of various states passed bills of ratification with different capitalization, spelling of words, or punctuation marks (e.g. semi-colons instead of commas). Another argument made by some tax protesters is that because Congress did not pass an official proclamation recognizing Ohio’s year 1803 admission to statehood until 1953 (see Ohio Constitution), Ohio was not a state until 1953 and therefore the Sixteenth Amendment was not properly ratified. These arguments have been universally rejected by the courts.”
and a more detailed and scholarly examination is available at:
http://evans-legal.com/dan/tpfaq.html#ratification
There is also the fact that being absolutely certain that you are in the right is cold comfort while you are spending several years in federal prison for tax evasion.
Of course, most federal prisoners do not have to pay income tax.
Socialist,
That income tax claim has been around for years. The 16th Amendment was lawfully enacted. Charlatans, scam artists, and antitax fools keep yacking about the illegality of the income tax simply because they want that to be so. Anyone who buys into their nonsense will be violating the law and face prosecution for tax evasion.
John Barelli – Roach didn’t imply that darcy was being irresponsible by running for congress while having a small child. She outright said so. The part I don’t get is what that has to do with McMorris, who as far as I know has no children. (I stand corrected on her being recently married.)
Having real children and having the potential to have children are very different. One is a real situation, requiring real choices. The second is a theoretical exercise. Is goldy a seer? Can he foretell McMorris’ future, and the decisions she will make in the future? In the here and now, darcy has chosen to ignore her young son and campaign 24/7.
I wouldn’t advise anyone to stop paying there In come taxes thought
In the documentary I watch a juror was interviewed about a the case she sat on which was a case about someone how didn’t pay his income taxes. And they ended up finding the guy innocent because the government could not show them the law that says you have to pay income taxes.
Any ways it was a very interesting video .. I thought of B.M. all the way threw it :-)
Janet:
How do you know Darcy is neglecting her child? You are just making this up.
It probably would be a good idea to have representatives with small children in Congress. They might actually recognize that what they do today will affect their children’s future.
Janet, do you deliberately not capitalize Darcy and Goldy?
What I’ve Learned About US Foreign Policy: The war against the Third World
http://video.google.com/videop.....9658676035
This doc. is totaly legitament. And everyone should watch this.
There is even an Old Bill Moyer Piece in there. It’s about 7 different main stream shows joined to make a really good history of our Foreign Policy sence the end of WW2
It is really good you will like it !!!!
I sent a copy to the Socialist party to use in there meeting to show other members.
47
Your probibly right
Janet-
Mary Bono had 2 children, ages 6 and 9, when she became a U.S. representative… she didn’t turn down the appointment, and continued to run for re-election. I assume you disapprove of her, too.
Oh, wait… she has an (R) after her name, and IOKIYAR.
17
I see that our friend John Craig just can’t leave me alone. He still has not corrected the spelling error either. This man is as much a doctor as I am a nuclear physicist.
Here is the Socialist Party blog if anyone wants to check it out
http://www.sp-usa.org/bulletin/index.php
I wrote another negitive letter to ABC today about the 911 propagand piece there makeing
““I don’t belong to an organized political party. I’m a Democrat.” – Will Rogers.
Commentby Janet S— 9/7/06@ 3:47 pm
Interesting argument, but if someone should not run for Congress because she has a small child, it is a reasonable extension of that argument that someone should not run for Congress is there is a strong possibility that she will have a child during the term of office.
If Ms. McMorris wishes to publicly pledge to leave office if she becomes pregnant during her term, that would clear up the problem, although I do not suggest that she do so. I’m of the impression that a capable woman can be both a mother and Congresswoman at the same time. While I may disagree with Ms. McMorris’ politics, I have no problem with the idea that she may become a mother during her term of office, and should she do so, I would wish her and her child well.
I also have no real issue with Ms. Roach supporting Mr. Reichert. She may well believe that he would be a better Congressman than Ms. Burner, although I would disagree with her evaluation.
I do have a problem with a public figure using what seems to be different standards based on party membership.
Turn the situation around. Do you honestly believe that Ms. Roach would have made her comment if Ms. Burner were the Republican candidate?
Since it was a partisan comment, it is fair game for partisan responses. While most folks here think that Ms. McMorris should get out of the race, it is for reasons entirely separate from her gender and family status. We’re just pointing out a certain level of hypocrisy.
If the situation were turned around, Mr. Sharkanski over at SP would be having a field day with it. As it was a Republican that managed to open her mouth wide enough for both of her feet, we get the fun over here.
Still, nobody here actually thinks Ms. McMorris is unqualified because she could have a child while in Congress. We just think she made a lousy Congresswoman, and think Mr. Goldmark would be better.
Oh did I mention I voted for Hong Trans yet?
I vote bye mail
Oh you can figure out what judges to vote for bye looking up the king co.demercratic partys endorsments for judges :-)
#59
Im sure you probably don’t think Woman should really vote at all .
Our even speak un less Spoken to ………
Has any one seen this movie before
The Dunwich Horror (1970)
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0065669/
Im trying to decide weather to download it or not :-/
Commentby The Socialist— 9/7/06@ 4:17 pm
Actually, I once read a suggestion that, since women were not allowed to vote for the first 100+ years of our country’s history, perhaps it would be fair for us men to be disenfranchised for the same amount of time.
They could hardly do worse than we’ve managed.
I have a question that I’d like our friends on the right to address. In particular, please define “victory” in Iraq. Presumably, “victory” at least means an outcome sufficient to justify pulling our troops from that hell hole, but maybe not. Your answer, at a minimum, should identify an objective measurement for evaluating whether we have indeed “won” in Iraq. Anyone up to the task? I’m thinking that if none of you can provide a coherent definition of victory in Iraq, then staying there makes no sense.
Janet-
In 2001, Massachusetts governor Jane Swift gave birth to twins. She didn’t resign from her position; she kept on serving. She put her infant children in day care and in fact employed her aides to pick up her children from day care. I assume you disapprove of her actions too.
Ooops, she was also a Republican! Who would have guessed?
Has anyone watched Deep Blue ? I watched it the other night. It was really good . I got it of usenet.
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0365109/
#63
I some times think it would be better if woman ran the Gov. but then I think of Katherine Harris or Libby Dole or ack Jennifer Dunn
Oh I found my movie for to night
X-Men.The.Last.Stand.DVDRip
More half truths from the lying lefties…
1. Jane Smith was an interim ‘acting’ governor.
2. “ Jane Swift, Massachusetts’ first female governor, dropped her bid for a full term Tuesday, saying she could not run a campaign and govern the state while giving her young children the attention they deserve. “
Oh and for the uninitiated Usenet news groups is were you get all the free software with the cracks you could ever want or use :-/
#69
I thought that was what nannies were for ?
Im thinking about making oatmeal cookies :-/
Hey, ASS,
How about you? Willing to take a whack at my question posted at 64?
I think all the neo bOObs are still trying to figure out if they have to pay income taxes or not .
Which I am still not sure about my self
By using your definition of ‘victory”, I guess Bosnia, Germany and Japan were total failures since we still have troops based there.
But this is a great FIRST step toward that process in Iraq…
War in Iraq
Iraq takes control of military from U.S.
September 7, 2006
BY REBECCA SANTANA ASSOCIATED PRESS
BAGHDAD, Iraq– Coalition forces handed over control of Iraq’s armed forces command to the government Thursday, a move that U.S. officials have hailed as a crucial milestone on the country’s difficult road to independence.
The prime minister takes control of Iraq’s small naval and air forces and the 8th Iraqi Army Division. However, it is still unclear how rapidly the Iraqi forces will be prepared to take over their own security.
“From today forward, the Iraqi military responsibilities will be increasingly conceived and led by Iraqis,” said Gen. George Casey, the top U.S. commander in Iraq, at a ceremony.
Yes, we have to pay taxes… don’t be a simpleton.
What we don’t need to do ie elect morons who have vowed to RAISE our taxes.
If there are any Demorcrisy now lovers out there you can listen to it here 5 days a week at 5am and 5:30 pm week days
http://www.kser.org/pages/schedule
ASS at 75
Good point concerning Germany, etc. I’m not committed to all troops having to be pulled. What’s your definition of victory? I don’t want to hear about a “good first step.” What’s the end plan here? I’m sure you’ve thought this out before, haven’t you?
I only want to raise taxes on the top 5% IE: repeal the Bush tax cuts for the rich…..
I would all so like to close the camen island loop hole to
I really don’t think they really think anything out to tell you the truth.
69-
1. So the fact that ‘acting’ was in her job title makes it OK, right? Because an ‘acting’ governor, unlike a real governor, has the time to sit around and watch her children all day?
2. Yes, you’re right, this was the only time in recorded history that a politican or corporate executive about to have his or her ass handed to him or her (in this case, in the primary, where she would have been facing the ultra-deep-pockets of Mitt Romney) has fallen on his or her sword by saying that he or she “needed to spend more with his or her family.” (No doubt, if the Massachusett’s GOP establishment had been behind her re-election and begged her to remain in office, she still would have refused and said that she needed to spend more time with her family.)
Except how to steal the next election :-/
and how best to rip off the tax payers
I wonder some times if republicans are capable of telling the truth about anything
Bush Urges Congressional Approval of Eavesdropping Program
By William Branigin
Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, September 7, 2006; 2:08 PM
President Bush urged Congress today to give him “additional authority” to carry out a controversial warrantless eavesdropping program directed against international terrorists and to approve “broader reforms” in the 1978 law that regulates domestic surveillance of foreign agents’ communications.
I remember a time when the republicans would have become apoplectic if Clinton would have tried to do such a thing as Urges Congressional Approval of Eavesdropping Program
But I guess if it’s a republican it all right ….
I swear if Bush wanted to just do away with our Democracy and the constitution B.M. and the rest of the wing nutz would think it was a good idea :-/
You know something I really get along qwite well with out cable
I haven’t had cable for a couple of years now..
“I don’t belong to an organized political party. I’m a Democrat.” – Will Rogers.
Howcanyoube 9/7/06@ 4:49 pm
While I question the wisdom of bringing Ms. Swift into the conversation as she did, after all, decide not to run again, the question of why she actually decided not to run is open to much debate.
From Wikipedia:
“By the end of her term, Swift was extremely unpopular with voters in the state (at one point having the dubious honor of a single-digit approval rating). This unpopularity was due in part to an abuse of her gubernatorial privileges, including her alleged use of a State Police helicopter to return from Boston to her home in North Adams and demands that State House aides pick up her children at day care.”
From CNN March 19, 2002, announcing Mitt Romney’s entering the race for Governor of Massachusetts:
“In a recent Boston Herald poll of likely Republican voters, 75 percent said they would vote for Romney while only 12 percent said they would vote for Swift. Swift said she would support Romney’s campaign.
While I agree that she may not have been the best example for us to bring up, she’s hardly a shining star on your side either. She’s out of office now, taking care of her children, and I think both parties agree that in this individual case, that was the best decision she could have made.
(Gotta watch those HTML tags.)
John Wikipedia has been shown to be not exactly reliable.
You know that right?
Oh don’t go to the huffington post any more they put a couple of bots on the computer if you do
I really like there site but im sick of having to take the stupid bots off every time I visit it :-(
““I don’t belong to an organized political party. I’m a Democrat.” – Will Rogers.
“I swear if Bush wanted to just do away with our Democracy and the constitution B.M. and the rest of the wing nutz would think it was a good idea :-/ “
I thought he already did, and they already had.
http://colorado.indymedia.org/...../index.php
Three people present for the meeting that day all confirm that the President of the United States called the Constitution “a goddamned piece of paper.”
Yeah I have herd about that.
Watch that vidio about our fourine polisy sence ww2 and you will we lost it along time ago I think ….
http://video.google.com/videop.....9658676035
we=see :-)
sorry
im going to watch the Lear news hour on ch 9 bbl
Well, regarding Jane Swift, who were the evil liberals pointing guns at her heads forcing her to serve as ‘acting’ governor against her wishes? She could have resigned immediately upon having her children, or she could have declined taking on gubernatorial powers in the first place, knowing that she was pregnant at the time. Instead she chose to subject her poor little children to the Dickensian horrors of Massachusetts day care, right? (If she were a Democrat, that is.)
And I haven’t heard anyone say anything about Mary Bono yet… a single mother to two children who were present for their father’s horrific death weeks earlier. Some might say that, given the circumstances, she greedily grabbed for the brass ring of power rather than tending to her children in probably their greatest hour of need… right? (Well, if she were a Democrat.)
I don’t think anyone should be disqualified from being in public office, just because they have a small child.
Congress, however, is a lot more demanding than being a state legislator, county official, or judge.
I wish both Darcy Burner and Cathy McMorris the best in their family situations. And hope that their service in Congress doesn’t deter them from having the number of children that they would otherwise desire to have in their respective families.
Pam Roach is a worthless twat.
No offense to all the good vaginas out there.
I bought into the whole “women’s rights” thing in the 80’s, and went back to work full time after my first child. I hated it. So did all the other female MBA’s that I was working with. I soon went to part time, then quit altogether, as did all of my female colleagues. Life is too short to miss out on valuable time with your child, if you can afford it. I fully understand those who have to work. Supporting a child is the most basic of instincts.
Darcy can campaign full time if she wants. I don’t care. I just can’t imagine how you can miss those years. Congress can wait. Mary Bono? Who cares? She isn’t my rep. If a repub in my district who had a very young child decided to run for national office, I’d be equally as critical.
Does the woman ever stop? She really would fit in with Miss Harris down in Florida.
Janet, here’s where some of the basic Republican tenets differ from those held by most Democrats: you think that whatever solution you choose should be forced on everyone else. If you choose to be a Christian, you think that should be the only choice allowed. If you choose to be a full-time stay-at-home mother, you think that should be the only choice allowed. If you choose to be married to someone of a different gender, you think that should be the only choice allowed.
But you fail to realize that for other people in other circumstances, other choices may be better. And your narrow-minded inability to think beyond your own personal circumstances is not a virtue, but instead a critical failure in your mental and emotional capacity.
If Democrats are under the impression that most Republicans are narrow-minded bigots, it’s because of people such as you, who are loud and wrong.
Has it ever occurred to you, by the way, that it’s possible Darcy’s choice to run now might not be the self-centered career move you’re assuming it is, but instead might be a reaction to the urgent need to take this country in a very different direction than the self-destructive path we’re on now? Or are you one of those people hoping to speed along the rapture in any way possible?
yeah, yeah, yeah, Janet S, you can be critical of others as long as you want. But the question remains, “Who provides the most service to our country, the person (woman with child) who volunteers to serve, or those who stay at home.
Perhaps you would like to enlighten us on those “patriotic” fathers who “volunteered” for duty in Iraq.
Perhaps you would like to enlighten us on those “patriotic” fathers who “volunteered” for duty in Iraq. -Commentby Unkl Witz— 9/7/06@ 11:09 pm
Meet my stepson Chris, you prick, who left behind his beautiful wife Stephanie and baby Nathan, whose daddy was barely 2 when he left for Iraq to defend your right to insult him.
Nathan was barely 2… his daddy was old enough to put his ;ife on the line for cut and run cowardly traitors.
Wow! An endorsement from Pam Roach. That’s worth one, maybe two pitchers of warm spit.
Cathy McMorris shouldn’t have gotten married f she wants to serve in Conrgess. She’s going to abbandon her poor husband. Despicable!
The problem with “income tax being unconstitutional” is that Amendment 16 doesn’t empower Congress to collect income taxes, the Constitution does. Whether or not Amendment 16 existed, the Congress would be able to set taxes. Amendment 16 just changed it so there wouldn’t be this huge bunch of formulas running around.
This is amendment 16: “The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several States, and without regard to any census or enumeration.”
The only thing that Amendment 16 changed was apportionment and whether or not the tax depended on the census or state headcounts.
As far as the Ohio problem, if you count Ohio in the Union at the time, there were 41 states, 38 had ratified, 92.7%
If you don’t count Ohio, then 40 states, 37 ratified 92.5%
If you decide that Ohio counts but they should base ratification on all the states, since 9 didn’t get a chance to ratify since they weren’t in the Union yet then 50 states, 38 ratified 76%
ASS
So Chris has a real live baby that he has no intention of paying attention to? Chris has chosen to ignore his young son and go ti Iraq. His child is real, and =he has made a decision not to be there for his son. Apparently this is a badge of honor that she is a man who is not shackled to his baby. The child may be very happy and successful. But that doesn’t mean that it is preferable for children to grow up this way.
Crap. Missedone…
“Apparently this is a badge of honor that he is a man who is not shackled to his baby…”
Since goldy isn’t talking about it, I’ll bring it up here:
Cantwell has compromised her integrity. She has funneled taxpayer dollars to her mentor, love interest, manager, advisor, whatever. She has given him her own money, now she gives him ours. Seems to me this is more important than a 13 year old DUI.
The most unbelievable part is Dotzauer still not being able to remember why Cantwell gave him many thousands of dollars six years ago.
Cantwell should be toast after this, but I suspect that the dem party around here doesn’t really care about ethics when it means giving up power.
little darcy is abandoning her child, the gratefully UNABORTED but inconvenient HenryleftBehind when he needs her most. Daddy darcy has a JOB. Mommy Stephanie stayed home with baby Nathan.
You must not be much of a ‘daddy’ prick,… babies and toddlers need their mommies far more than daddies at that age and volumes of studies prove that.
The gratefully UNABORTED but inconvenient HenryleftBehind is a plaything to be taken off the shelf for a photo op and clearly a just another check mark on little darcys To-do list.
And oh gee, fighting to serve YOU, you little prick vs a smug inept, bored woman stroking her own ego… no contest, you miserable excuse for an American.
ASS
Fuck you. Don’t like the taste of our resident attack dog’s medicine? Complain to someone who cares.
This is Dave the Coward‘s MO: get somone else to do his dirty work. He should go on record about what HE as to say about Darcy’s parenthod, and if he does not disavow Pam Roach’s trash, well, then the voters can make up their own minds about Mr. 46%.
Oh, and ASS
Your contempt for thsoe who dedicate their time, their money, and their lives to public service SHOULD lead them to utterly ignore your interests. But it won’t, because their dedication outweighseven their pity for your pathetic ASS. Talk about a “miserable excuse for an American.” Just like all Republicans, your projection is showing.
ps: you miserable prick… Chris has been serving YOU and the rest of the yellow liberal traitors SINCE 1988.
little darcy has chosen to stoking her ego SINCE birthing the gratefully UNABORTED but inconvenient HenryleftBehind.
So let’s ask ourselves what’s in store for the gratefully UNABORTED but inconvenient HenryleftBehind:
little darcy gets elected, drags the gratefully UNABORTED but inconvenient HenryleftBehind 3000 miles away from daddy darcy who has a JOB and a career and plops he gratefully UNABORTED but inconvenient HenryleftBehind diapered behind in daycare while she “works” all day, then with a sitter so she can DC party all night: The gratefully UNABORTED but inconvenient HenryleftBehind misses both mommy dearest AND daddy darcy.
OR
little darcy gets elected and leaves the gratefully UNABORTED but inconvenient HenryleftBehind home with daddy darcy who has a JOB and a career. Daddy darcy plops his diapered behind in daycare while hhe works all day to pay the mortgage, get those stock options and pay for little darcys hobby-of-the-month, then comes home to an empty house and a whining toddler who needs and misses his mommy dearest.
Oh gee… who’s the big loser while little darcy is out stroking her ego? The gratefully UNABORTED but inconvenient HenryleftBehind is the big loser.
ASS, you’re missing the obvious: Henry’s daddy can quit his job when Darcy wins.
ASS – that’s the most disgusting hate screed I’ve ever read from you. And that’s saying a hell of a lot!
You’re the traitor ASS. You fanatically support a power-mad ruler whose circle has wrought a sinkhole of death and despair throughout the world and has trampled on our rights here at home and made corruption business as usual. You support people like Dino Rossi who would bring that style of corruption to Olympia.
But keep it up ASS. Thank you for being the face of the Republican Party these days. Folks are finally catching on thanks to people like you.
ASS, you’re missing the obvious: Henry’s daddy can quit his job when Darcy wins. -Commentby Fred— 9/8/06@ 10:33 am
Um… oh gee… daddy darcy’s Microsoft EXECUTIVE salary with stock benefits vs a meager $165,200 per year for 2 years if little darcy gets elected.
Right.
the truth is ugly aptlynamedclueless… little darcy’s ego diversion is screwing the gratefully UNABORTED but inconvenient HenryleftBehind… the one single person she SHOULD love more than life itself.
So Ass… are you going to join Janet S in her disapproval (hedged but implied at #99) of Mary Bono for leaving behind her young children in their greatest hour of need to become a Congresswoman (and at least stay logically consistent)? Or are you going to offer the same excuses for her that you did for Jane Swift, who abandoned her vulnerable little babies in day care for two and a half years so she could exercise her little ego diversion of ‘acting’ at being governor of Massachusetts (thus outing yourself as a purely partisan hack)?
Mary Bono’s children were not toddlers when she took her dead husbands place in congress.
Jane Swift was ALREADY in office when she became pregnant. When she saw the toll it took on her family, she dropped out of the following campaign. And yes, I know she was down in the polls, but I submit the fact of her being down indicated she’d have to campaign that much harder and spend that much more time away from her family which influenced her decision that it was less important to “win” than to be with her children.
little darcy has made a conscious decision that the gratefully UNABORTED but inconvenient TODDLER HenryleftBehind is less important to her than her own ego… but she has recognized his value as a political fashion accessory.
No, your facts are wrong. Jane Swift did not become pregnant while in office. She took office when she was pregnant, in fact, eight months pregnant. Paul Cellucci resigned as governor April 10, 2001. Jane Swift gave birth May 15, 2001. She knew what she was getting into. If she were a Democrat, you would say that she should have declined to assume gubernatorial powers, but instead she made a conscious decision that her newborn twins were less important to her than her own ego. Instead, you continue to defend her decision to plop her kids’ diapered behinds into day care for two and a half years.
I’m trying to tread lightly since the death of Sonny Bono is genuinely tragic… so here’s a hypothetical exercise for you. Suppose John Edwards was still senator, and he suddenly died violently with his children present. His children are currently aged 8 and 6. Now suppose the Democratic governor of North Carolina decided to appoint Elizabeth Edwards to his seat. Do you say “Those kids are old enough to fend for themselves,” as you did with Mary Bono, or do you say “How dare Elizabeth Edwards, a single mother, abandon her young children at the most vulnerable time in their lives, in order to take up her hobby-of-the-month and stroke her ego?” I have a pretty clear sense of how you’d answer, but here’s your chance to prove me wrong.
She was in office as Lt Governor when she got pregnant and was APPOINTED as interim governor when she was pregnant.
I never implied that school age kids were old enough to “fend for themselves”, but their burgeoning independence is a far cry from the absolute dependence of a TODDLER.
Nice try.
Yes, thank you for restating exactly what I stated: that Jane Swift was appointed as acting governor when she was eight months pregnant… even though she could have turned down the appointment, given the fact that she knew she was about to have twins and faced the choice between acting as governor or plopping her kids’ diapered behinds into day care for the remaining two and a half years of her term (which, come to think of it, she’d have to do anyway, since I assume the lieutenant governor doesn’t just sit around all day eating bon bons and waiting for the governor to die).
And I assume from your non-answer at 124 that, as far as you’re concerned, Elizabeth Edwards would be free and clear to abandon little Emma and Jack? Well, that’s nice to know that you’re so forward-thinking. So, then, what is the right age for abandonment? If Darcy Burner loses this year and runs again in 2008, when Henry is 5 and old enough for kindergarten, I assume you’ll not make an issue out of him at that point, since he will have lost all traces of his previous dependence, right?
I’m just trying to fill in some of the grey areas between the moral precepts that structure your world, because right now, the way I understand it is:
Having a child, deciding to run for office, putting child in day care = bad
Getting elected to office, deciding to have a child, putting child in day care = good
Taking office despite having a 3-year-old who’s in an apparently happy household with a supportive father = bad
Taking office despite having a 6-year-old whose father just died = good
Or more likely:
Democrat = bad
Republican = good
Nice spin, nice try… no sale.
“Supportive” daddy is NOT the same as a stay at home and love your toddler who is just learning the world parent
But, I suppose that folks who want daycare strangers to be the major influence on their inconvenient childs mind have no problem dumping them there.
As a parent x3, I can certainly tell you that newborns don’t care who feeds them, burps them or changes their diaper.. they only care that it’s done.
School age children need direction from their parents, but they are of the age they are finding their wings. Furthermore, they spend their day in school and are busy with a multitude of out-of-school activities. I presume in the case of the Bono children they are in school in DC and home in the evening with their only surviving parent.
daddy darcy has a great, well paying executive job with Microsoft. I sure don’t recall any announcement that he’s giving it up for little darcy’s ego whim. Therefore, one has to conclude that little darcy goes east 3000 miles, daddy stays west at Microsoft and the gratefully UNABORTED but inconvenient TODDLER HenryleftBehind is PURPOSELY (and I might say, maliciously) denied access to one parent on a routine daily basis. Furthermore, in order to SEE the routinely MIA parent the gratefully UNABORTED but inconvenient TODDLER HenryleftBehind will be exposed to frequent, tiring, miserable cross country air travel.
Yep, nothing like putting the child you should love more than life ahead of your ego whims.
Well, then to be consistent, you should also condemn Jane Swift for putting her ego whims ahead of the children she should have loved more than life itself. Pretty simple, if you ask me, and much more pleasant than sitting on top of that volcano of cognitive dissonance.
Or, to be consistent, you could just say “Help! I’m a Republican partisan, and the worst thing I can think of to say against Darcy Burner is that she puts her son in day care, despite the fact that by doing so, I’m also implictly insulting the most key swing demographic in WA-08, suburban working mothers, without whom Dave Reichert has no hope of winning, many of whom have no choice but to use day care in order to be able to work and make ends meet, and who probably don’t appreciate the implication that women who ‘choose’ to use day care are negligent monsters!”
Anyway, all good things must come to an end, so you may have the last word if you’d like…
Just to humanize myself a bit, my wife is currently staying home with our 2-year-old, even though she had a fine job beforehand and would call herself a “feminist” if asked. And that’s something I’m definitely happy with, since they clearly have a lot of fun together and have a strong bond and it’s not as if she had such a compelling career before that she misses it much. And I’m sure it’s something many, if most not most, young moms would want, assuming they were lucky enough to have a husband who earned enough money to make that arrangement work on one income… and frankly, a world with more stay-at-home moms would probably be a better world for it.
On the other hand, though, if my wife really did have a really compelling calling (and it was a calling that at least covered the cost of day care…) whether it was being a basket weaver or a test pilot or a U.S. Representative, I’d be happy with her pursuing that and having our son in day care to do it. Either way, it’s a difficult choice filled with compromises and probably some regrets… but the best policy (I think) is to assume that adult women have the maturity to think that through and decide individually what’s best for them, rather than tut-tutting at either the working moms or the stay-at-home moms. Cheers.
Nice try… Janes babies were just that: babies… and we covered them ^^up^^ there.
Re: daycare… there is a vast difference between moms that have no choice but to work and MUST use daycare, and little darcy with her current CHOSEN ego whim.
little darcy is PURPOSELY CHOOSING her whim over her child, the gratefully UNABORTED but inconvenient TODDLER HenryleftBehind.
How sad for the gratefully UNABORTED but inconvenient TODDLER HenryleftBehind and little darcy that she is so shallow she has to bounce like a pinball from one thing to another in her attempt to find fulfillment. Good luck with that, little darcy.
On a personal note, not one of our 3 children ever spent a single moment in daycare or with a nanny.
RE: 130
I applaud your wifes decision and celebrate the fun they share and the bond they build daily.
For those with no alternatives but to work, it is a heart breaking decision to put your child in anothers hands.
For those with no need to work, their self-centered attitude disgusts me.
HEY JANET S IS THAT TRUE THAT MIKE MCGABITCH WAS NOT PRESENT WHEN HIS WIFE WAS IN LABOR? TOO BUSY WITH POLITICS TO BE PRESENT FOR CHILD BIRTH.