Damn… you think if I ran for U.S. Senate, the insurance industry would pay me $4.5 million too?
According to a filing today with the Securities and Exchange Commission, Safeco CEO Mike McGavick will get a sweet $4.5 million package for leaving Safeco and challenging incumbent Sen. Maria Cantwell. I guess cutting over 1,200 jobs, pulling out of the hurricane prone Florida market, and dramatically hiking rates really does pay… if you’re the CEO.
Of course, this does raise a bit of hypothetical question… if Safeco pays McGavick $4.5 million to leave the company and run for the Senate, and then McGavick puts, say, $4.5 million of his own money into his campaign… how is this not a clever bit of money laundering designed to get around the campaign finance laws? Hypothetically.
Meanwhile, it looks like McGavick’s going to need all the money the insurance industry can launder give him. A new poll by the GOP pollster Strategic Vision has Cantwell leading McGavick 50% to 39%, and that doesn’t bode so well for the Republicans according to David Johnson, president of Strategic Vision:
“Senator Cantwell has reached the magic 50% mark in match-ups against possible challengers; that shows that Republicans will have a hard job in defeating her if these numbers remain.
That’s okay… McGavick has a lucrative future ahead of (and behind) him as an insurance industry lobbyist.
UPDATE:
Here’s the link to the SEC filing. In addition to the accelerated vesting of $4.5 million in unvested stock, he’s also eligible for a bonus for 2005. Sweet.
You see, to an insurance bastard you’re all the same. They don’t care if you’re Mark the Redneck, or Mr. Cynical, or even garbage-eating, pus-sucking vermin like JCH.
They don’t care if you vote the straight Republican ticket, give money to the Evergreen Freedom Foundation, or sport a big fat RUSH IS RIGHT bumper sticker.
If they can screw you out of a nickel, they will. If they can avoid paying a claim, they will. If they can nickel and dime you till you holler Uncle, hey, you can’t expect them to assume any RISK, can you? Hell,they’ll just cancel you.
That’s why if everybody who has ever been screwed over by Safeco votes for Cantwell, this poor sod won’t even get Nethercutt numbers, or Linda Smith numbers.
Goldy, do you have a link to the SEC filing by Safeco?
Is Safeco ALREADY OBLIGATED to pay $4.5 million or any other sum if he voluntarily leaves his post as CEO? Or is this $4.5 million simply a GIFT to Mike McGavick?
How does this differ much from Randy “Duke” Cunningham’s case if the $4.5 million is simply a GIFT? Of course, Democrats have pulled similar stunts as well.
Okay, I found it. Safeco filed four items today, with the SEC index listed at:
http://www.sec.gov/Archives/ed.....-index.htm
The “Executive Transition Services Agreement” between Safeco and Mike McGavick (signed yesterday) may be found at:
http://www.sec.gov/Archives/ed.....dex101.htm
Corporate underwriters are common…
..for TV SHOWS
Hmm, $4.5 Mil to be the sacrificial lamb? Damn! I knew I went into the wrong field…
Maybe McGavicky and Nethernuts can open some sort of lobbying firm. That’d be a helluva sitcom!
I love how these corporate crapweasels get severance packages that are the size of the GDP of an island nation. They get paid to not do stuff. Super.
Maybe it would help to have the Wabbit or Lawyer X interpret this agreement. But I note Section 3.3(b), where McGavick gets to exercise unvested stock options that would have otherwise been forfeited on his voluntary termination.
3,001 shares at $33.32
102,097 shares at $33.32
105,200 shares at $38.19
Safeco closed at $56.40 today, down 70 cents (perhaps based on McGavick having more shares and diluting existing stock value), and is further down to $56.19 in after hours trading. Perhaps the $4.5 million is based on yesterday’s close of $57.10.
http://finance.yahoo.com/q?s=SAFC
So I get an instant profit of $4,341,353.84 based on today’s closing price. It would have probably been right at $4.5 million based on yesterday’s closing price or today’s high price of $57.28.
But let’s don’t forget Section 3.2, which allows Safeco’s Board of Directors to give McGavick a “BONUS” for 2005 in such amount as they may determine using their “discretion”:
3.2 Bonus
Executive may also be entitled to receive, in addition to the base salary described above, an annual bonus for 2005 in an amount to be determined by the Board of Directors of Safeco or under the Board’s delegated authority by the Compensation Committee of the Board (the “Committee”), in its or their sole discretion. Executive’s bonus will be based on (i) a smooth and orderly transition of the responsibilities of the Chief Executive Officer, (ii) the Executive’s commitment to remain with Safeco until the Separation Date, (iii) the performance of Executive’s duties as described in Section 2 above, and (iv) Safeco’s financial and operating performance for fiscal year 2005.
This “BONUS” could be many millions of dollars, in addition to the GIFT of $4,341,353.84 in otherwise forfeited stock options.
Paul Berendt is officially stepping down as WSDCC chair…
@ 10
Do you have a link?
Don’t worry, Mark the Redneck’s invisible hand will handle this situation.
(a) No one will buy Safeco insurance
(b) No one will buy Safeco stock
(c) No more Safeco
Received an e-mail from the party about it. Much earlier than I expected.
I’d like to know what the Safeco board is paying Paula Rosput Reynolds, the new CEO. It’s the same job, so it should pay the same, right? Or will she get paid less because
(a) she’s a woman
(b) she’s not running for U.S. Senate
Part of the letter…
I am writing to inform you that I have decided to step down as Chairman of the Washington State Democratic Party effective the next regularly scheduled meeting of the Democratic State Committee on January 28, 2006. We will hold a special election at that time for the remainder of my term which will run until party-wide reorganization in January of 2007.
There are many important reasons why I have made the decision to step down at this time. I would like to share them with you.
I am currently the longest serving Democratic State Party Chairman in the United States. While having consistency and stability in our party has been a tremendous asset, I believe there comes a time when a change in the chairmanship is beneficial and that time has come. Change will be good for our party and good for me personally.
The challenges brought forth by the three ballot counts and five lawsuits in the Governor’s election contest challenge were very intense and draining to me. Although Governor Gregoire’s victory and the part I was able to play in her election will always be a highlight of my life, I believe it is best for me to have a change of pace at this time. I can honestly say that I have been able to get up and enthusiastically meet the challenges of the state party every day that I have served as your chair. But, I believe that a new perspective and some fresh energy will add to the momentum that I sense is building for the 2006 election cycle. The state party chairmanship is a tough job. You deserve a leader who is at the top of their game at all times.
I am passionate in my belief that we are poised to win many great victories in 2006. Maria Cantwell will be strong heading into this election year. I am willing to wager today that our party will pick up many Congressional and state legislative seats in the mid-term election. I believe it is only fair to my successor to leave at a time when more victories are possible in the 2006 and 2008 election cycles.
—
So who should be the next chair?
Actually, I should have looked at the Form 8-K, which explains things in plain English.
http://www.sec.gov/Archives/ed.....92/d8k.htm
The $4.5 million was based on yesterday’s $57.10 closing price.
McGavick is giving up $8.2 million in other unvested stock options by resigning from Safeco at this time. And he has agreed not to compete with Safeco for three years. Still, this $4.5 million will seem like a lot of folks as a GIFT, just like the super-inflated executive salaries seem mostly like a GIFT, even when someone is actually working for them.
I wonder how much of his $$$ is prorated severance, for years he hasn’t worked at Safeco, you know, to pad the amount.
Hey, remember when SafeCo started including Credit Scores in their insurance rates? About three years ago, they let a bunch of their customers’ policies lapse without notice — in order to get rid of them.
A lot of policy holders got burned in that ditching, because they had to get insurance after the previous policy lapsed.
This pissed tons of people off.
McGavick is the CEO who brought it to us.
Cool!!
Cantvotewell borrowed on her inflated dot.com stock, got her ass in deep financial hotwater and then AFTER GETTING ELECTED took money from organizations she said she wouldn’t to repay her campaign debt.
At least this is upfront!!!
Cantvotewell was a downright LIAR!
@ 16
Not true. She pledged to never take PAC money, and she never has.
Senator Cantwell will crush ANY GOP opponent. People are tired of the republican culture of corruption.
belltowner
Liar. Emily’s list is big time PAC money
Is it OK for the NEA and AFLCIO to “pay” Democrats to run for office?? [hehe…Democrats: economic parasites!]
@ 19
Here
@ 19
ok, maybe 1.8 percent, but thats it
Belltowner
you forgot its soft money, and they exempted themselves
MARIA CANTWELL (D-WA)
Indirect Expenditures
What are Independent Expenditures, Coordinated Expenditures and Communication Costs?
Expenditure data is only available for members of the House. The Senate has exempted itself from reporting expenditures.
belltowner
Nice asset on page 4 of her disclosre…campaign owes her from 1 to $4mm http://www.opensecrets.org/pfd.....6_2004.pdf
@ 23
Well thats no big one. Her stocks took a dump.
Belltowner
Called lying.
Said, “nobody can buy me cuz i’m rich”. Then her dot bomb stock tanks, and she has to beg from the PACs.
So she got herself elected, then took care of making herself whole.
Sanctimonious hypocrite.
Oh no! God forbid anyone take money from Emily’s List. I’m sure Cantwell is going to steer some hefty no-bid contracts their way, am I right? How terrible!
….
…..
Of course, Democrats have pulled similar stunts as well.
Yuh, sure. And these democrats would be just who, Mr. Pope?
@ 25
Ok, so how are you going hold Saddam Hussien responsible?
the deadly shoe
I say no difference in having Emily’s list buy your pro abortion vote versus some oil company buy your pro drilling vote.
I don’t know if we should call Emily’s List a PAC, as they’re not promoting special interest legislation or a particular issue. They’re more like a club that collects contributions from a large number of individual donors to help elect female candidates. That doesn’t strike me as the same thing as an issue or special interest PAC.
I guess its pro-abortion to some, and pro-choice to the rest of us.
Isn’t it irrelavant? Considering McGavick is pro-choice? atleast, if he wants to be elected.
Emily’s List resembles a political party more than a PAC.
@ 30
That’s exactly what they are! I didn’t have the facts on it, so I didn’t want to just up and say it (very untroll of me)
I mean, McGavick is pro-abortion
29
Emily’s list is not a pro-choice group. I would say that even if 100% of their membership was pro-choice, because their focus is not abortion rights, it’s supporting female candidates for public offices. They want to tear down the glass ceiling in politics.
Guess some people missed this important note?
IMPORTANT NOTE: As a matter of policy, this member of Congress does not accept PAC money. Any contributions listed below were reported by the PACs, not the member, and will likely be amended at some future date after the contributions are returned. Also note that any contributions listed below from “candidate committees” are not considered PAC contributions, but rather contributions from one campaign committee to another.
You find that nearly all that “PAC Money” is actually just from other candidates and campaigns and the rest is returned checks.
I find Tray.com to be a better resource for reporting than opensecrets. It’s a lot more clear there that she’ll receive and report a contribution(as required by law) and then eventually refund the money.
Liar. Emily’s list is big time PAC money
They have a PAC which can contribute directly to a campaign, but they haven’t given anything to Cantwell.
EMILY’s List “money” is actually contributions made by individual people directly to a campaign.
Whereas, Mike McGavick will be their to offer help to the glass ceiling’s owner, and a check to rebuild the glass ceiling.
Not much on Sucky Politics today besides event announcements. Only 1 or 2 comments per thread. Stefan’s shitty little blog is withering on the vine.
b.s.
Name the last conservative woman to get any decent funding from Emily’s list.
Its just another left wing funding group.
Nice candidacy. Having failed trying to pass I-330 to eliminate people’s rights, they will just have an insurance company place one of its reps in office.
Comment by Aexia— 12/7/05 @ 8:27 pm
“Guess some people missed this important note?”
The aforementioned note is for the 2004 cycle, and doesn’t show up for the 2006 cycle.
http://www.opensecrets.org/pac.....seAll=TRUE
Why not for 2006? Because it’s no longer true.
Comment by Roger Rabbit— 12/7/05 @ 8:25 pm
“Emily’s list is not a pro-choice group.”
http://www.emilyslist.org/about/
“As we complete our second decade of operation, EMILY’s List is needed more than ever before. The Bush Republicans have launched a sustained assault on the right to choose and advances for women.”
Seems like a pretty pro-choice statement to me. I do agree that they are primarily devoted to getting female candidates elected, well liberal ones at least.
Comment by Belltowner— 12/7/05 @ 8:28 pm
“Whereas, Mike McGavick will be their to offer help to the glass ceiling’s owner, and a check to rebuild the glass ceiling. ”
What do you base this on? Or is this just your knee jerk reaction because McGavick is a white Republican male and Cantwell is a white Democrat female?
Emilys list maybe a little left of center. It is not completely non-partisan like the American Center for Voting Rights.
I have a question about the credit scores that Safeco started using during McGavick’s reign.
They call these scores, which take into account reported credit histories, “Insurance Scores.” So, where do you get your Insurance Score Report to check for errors? That’s a good question. Tell me if you find out.
McGavick: Is he looking out for us, or out to get us?
@ 46
Jeez, cool your jets. Its a joke, relating the fact that McGavick is an insurance shill. I am sure he lets his wife drive, vote, work, and lots of other stuff outside the home.
I say (see?) no difference in having Emily’s list buy your pro abortion vote versus some oil company buy your pro drilling vote.
So, righton, you seem to have a problem with the rightwingnut theory that money=free speech. You realize, of course, that you have just taken the first step on the slippery slope to socialism, do you not?
Name the last conservative woman to get any decent funding from Emily’s list.
Why? The group is openly partisan for democratic candidates. So I put it to you–name the last liberal woman to get any decent funding from the Constitutional Law PAC right here in our own state, mr. righton?
Oops. I forgot. Only goppers are allowed to posit such nakedly rhetorical questions.
43, 45, 47
I think it’s fair to say Emily’s List is “left of center” in the sense they support Democratic candidates, and the orientation of their members is heavily pro-choice.
The question is whether Emily’s List is a PAC. I maintain they’re not; they’re a group of similar-thinking people focusing on electing female Democratic candidates.
It’s like the NRA. They aren’t conservative per se, they just care about gun rights. And most conservatives care about gun rights.
48
“McGavick: Is he looking out for us, or out to get us?”
Safeco’s high premiums, cancellation policies, poor return to shareholders, and McGavick’s salary and perks answer that question.
Safeco is McGavick’s personal piggy bank.
Emilys list maybe a little left of center. It is not completely non-partisan like the American Center for Voting Rights.
Incorrect. The ACVR is a front for the gopper partisan agenda. Your assertion is made either in ignorance of this fact or just pure bullshit propaganda.
57
Ah- you are just saying that because the truth hurts.
There’s absolutely no reason for me to believe that McGavick would do anything in office for ME. I have no reason to believe he would do anything but march in lockstep with Bush administration policies on the economy, energy, environment, pensions, social security, health care, corporate corruption, worker rights, consumer rights and bankruptcy, opening public lands to development and private ownership, selling BPA to private interests, deregulation, and a host of others — none of which serve my interests, and all of which are inimical to my interests as a non-wealthy worker-consumer-retiree.
There’s absolutely no reason for me to vote for McGavick, and a lot of reasons to vote against him. Barring a revelation that Cantwell is actually a space alien preparing the way for an invasion of our planet, she can count on getting my vote in 2006.
That is, unless a Diebold machine changes my vote into a vote for McGavick inside the machine, which is definitely a possibility. I think we may be headed for a country in which Republicans hold onto power by rigging the election machinery, in which case we may have a civil war.
That’s another reason why liberals must arm.
@ 53–roger. show no shame, here. Emily’s is a partisan bunch, be it a 501 or PAC. So what? It’s not like they have no such organizations in rightwingland. Christ, since they stopped letting the robber barons buy the government lock stock and barrel back in the early 20th century, the goppers practically invented such groups (mellon-sciafe, see).
Keep those bunny nails sharp!
@58: You make no sense, sir. But what is new in that regard?
Slade Gorton did a very poor job of dissecting RealNetworks and the damage that dot.com did to a lot of people.
Cantwell should have sold it at it’s high rather than margining it to borrow for her campaign…watching the “collateral” slink into the toilet.
The LEFTIST PINHEADS know how to orchestrate Individual Contributions to specific candidates. However, the “Maestro” is never totally obvious. These CLOWNS are most comfortable around the fringes of the campaign laws and out-of-bounds on their PROMISES!
Dems are the Party of “WHAT I REALLY MEANT WAS…..”
Cantvotewell is going to find herself checkmated if she makes too big a deal out of McGavick’s UPFRONT severance.
Cantvotewell got a free-ride because she waited until after to election to take all kinds of money. That point and those lists will be a big part of this race….for sure!!
Cantvotewell is a net loser on this one Goldy….watch!
Cynical @64: After reading some (well, more than some, alas) of your posts on the governor’s race, the prospects for passage of I-912, and Ron Sims’ re-election chances, I feel safe in discounting your political analysis. But don’t let me stop you for going for a “quadfecta”!
Peace and love, bro’
Rich people think that what’s good for them is good for everyone. These Gooper commenters are just stray dogs trying to lick up the crumbs. Oh, excuse me! They are merely letting themselves get trickled on.
You rock, Poonster!
I tried to post this on Asshole Sharkansky’s site, but the flaming bag of shit blocked me. He is a chicken shit asshole and I challenge him to a bare-knuckles-last-man-standing-duke-out.
What do you say you nutless Neocon Butt-fucker?
During his response to President Bush this afternoon, Murtha revealed, for the first time, that the Pentagon will ask for an additional $100 billion for operations in Iraq next year:
MURTHA: Twenty years it’s going to take to settle this thing. The American people is not going to put up with it; can’t afford it. We have spent $277 billion. That’s what’s been appropriated for this operation. We have $50 billion sitting on the table right now in our supplemental, or bridge fund we call it, in the Appropriations Committee. They’re going to ask for another $100 billion next year.
…
QUESTION: Can we come back to the $100 billion? You said that you expect the military to ask for $100 billion. Where are you getting that figure?
MURTHA: Where I get all my figures: the military.
Murtha has reason to know. He’s the ranking member of the House Defense Appropriations Subcommittee. The total cost of the Iraq war is quickly approaching the cost of Vietnam, which lasted 8 years.
McGavick was the most uninspiring, cold-hearted, inarticulate CEO SAFECO has ever had. He presided over the transformation of a company that used to care about the employee, the customer and the community it served to a company that looked only to quarterly profits and shareholder approval. If that is your vision of how your government should function, then he is your man.
If you think government has a different role in society than indifferent efficiency, vote for whoever is running against him.
I guess I’m not the only one who has noticed Sharky’s blog is suffering from low ratings. He has a total 19 comments to his last six posts. OUCH! Hopefully he is selling a few of Dino’s books. Hopefully, he gets a cut of the net.
And don’t forget his fundraiser. Have breakfast with someone who’s obsessed with where every voter in King County lives (whoa, there’s an interesting person), and whether they’ve notified the election commision of such.
I’m sure both the food and conversation around the table will be excellent.
Sharkansky is a total fucked up chickenshit balless piece of shit. Fuck him and his Nazi pals.
They will be the first ones up aginst the wall when the revolution comes.
I piss down their Nazi throats.
Hey, Sharkansky, you fucking coward.
Your mother sucks cocks in hell.
I will defend Sharkansky for once. (I know, the [quasi]anti-Semetic comment guy)
I’m sure his mother does not smoke rope in hell. It’s very nice that Stefan is doing a nice thing for the Urban League. I have slightly more respect for him now because of this, and I hope he continues to be more of a compassionate conservative (if ever such a thing were possible).
56, 57
Don’t let Rufus the Liar, or other right-wing fibmeisters, tell you the “American Center for Voting Rights” is a “non-partisan” group. It’s another RNC swift-boat group created to front GOP propaganda (read: bullshit). The Pittsburgh Tribune calls the group “a fraud” (ihttp://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/tribune-review/opinion/columnists/vassilaros/s_360812.html).
ACVR’s organizer and top contributor is Mark Hearne II, a St. Louis, MO lawyer who was a Reagan administration official, ran for Congress against Dick Gephardt, and served as general counsel for Bush/Cheney ’04, Inc.
ACVR’s media director, Jim Dyke, was the RNC’s Communications Director for the 2004 campaign, worked for the White House promoting the Harriet Miers nomination to the Supreme Court, and currently is a high-ranking staffer in Dick Cheney’s office.
ACVR’s web site claims its board chairman, “Brian A. Lunde has served at the highest professional levels within the national Democratic Party.” In fact, although Lunde has worked for Democrats in the past, he is a turncoat who contributed to Bush/Cheney 2004, served as executive director of Zell Miller’s “Democrats for Bush” group, and raised money for “Freshman PAC,” a GOP PAC whose stated goal is to maintain a Republican majority, and has worked as a Republican lobbyist. Lunde’s political associates include Karl Rove and indicted GOP lobbyist and moneyman Jack Abramoff.
Interestingly, ACVR’s address is a 3″ x 3″ mailbox in Dallas, TX (see photo here: http://www.bradblog.com/archives/00001282.htm)
For more information, see http://www.bradblog.com/ACVR.htm
@64
“Cantwell should have sold it at it’s high rather than margining it to borrow for her campaign…watching the ‘collateral’ slink into the toilet.”
May we assume the all-knowing Mr. Cynical shorted RNWK in February 1999, and is now filthy rich?
@66
“But don’t let me stop you for going for a ‘quadfecta’!”
In Mr. C’s case, a quad-defecta.
EMILY’s List does have a PAC. They do contribute a not small amount of money to candidates. But their primary and original source of supporting candidates has been through “bundling”, which is just private individuals giving money to campaigns. EMILY’s List simply encourages and facilitates this acitvity.
Liberals trying to Spin emilys
Come on, we’re not stupid. Emily’s list is for all the typiical left wing Dem causes, taking a thinner slice which is women only. They won’t support men, nor moderate/conservative women. They provde a ton of money and one courld argue “own” the women they support
Comment by Belltowner— 12/7/05 @ 9:06 pm
I would have know your original statment was a joke, if it had been funny. I’m not sure what kind of humor you were shooting for.
Comment by Smokin’ In The Boy— 12/7/05 @ 10:57 pm
“The total cost of the Iraq war is quickly approaching the cost of Vietnam, which lasted 8 years.”
Are you saying the the cost of the Iraq war is approaching the cost of Vietnam in nominal or real terms? The Vietnam war ended over 30 years ago, there’s been some significant inflation since then.
Comment by Roger Rabbit— 12/7/05 @ 9:31 pm (paraphrased)
“I think we may be headed for a state in which Democrats hold onto power by rigging the election process, in which case we may have a civil war.”
I changed three words, which HA Republican idealouge do you think you sound like?
Goddamn!
What kind of sick, twisted shut in asshole would actually pay to eat at the same table with that fat Nazi pig-fucker Sharkansky?
righton@43: you said…name one conservative woman to get decent funding from Emily’s list”.
Well, so, name one conservative woman to get decent funding from you – to what degree have you supported conservative women for office?
ConservativeFirst.
You stupid asshole.
This fucking neocon war of yours is costing hundreds of billions dollars and hundreds of thousands of lives, and you want to know if the cost is inflation-adjusted?
Fuck you, you fucking moron.
You should be horsewhipped and thrown to the dogs.
Marilyn
Jennifer Dunn.
Your turn…
Ellen Craswell.
Righton@85: Dunn wasn’t in my district. I liked Ellen Craswell because there were some issues on which I agreed with her – most notably, the gambling issue. We would not have had the expansion of gambling under Craswell that we had under Locke. BTW my opposition to gambling is based on economic policy. I just dodn’t want the expansion of gambling to be forced into small towns whose economy wasn’t diversified enought to absorb it. Our town opposed casinos, did not need casinos for revenues, has minimal gambling, and it’s economy is the envy of almost every city in the state.
Come on, we’re not stupid. Emily’s list is for all the typiical left wing Dem causes, taking a thinner slice which is women only. They won’t support men, nor moderate/conservative women. They provde a ton of money and one courld argue “own” the women they support
EMILY’s List PAC hasn’t given any money to Cantwell despite your assertions to the contrary.
Does anyone remember the name of the House Member who lost her seat in 1994? The one with a degree in public administration who was then hired by her political ally Rob Glasser as a VP of Marketing. This political ally then granted her stock options eventually worth over $18 million. Then she used her own $ to run for public office again. If anybody knows about windfall profits, she’s the one.
Sure wish I could remember her name.
marilyn
question was if i or Emily’s list gave. Yeah, to Jennifer Dunn, but we know Emily’s never funded Ellen, Jennifer, Katherine or any other conservative
aexia
go to the emily’s list site; they are begging for $$ for a bunch of lib women
Maria Cantwell , WA
Running for U.S. Senate, WA
Full Profile
Summary Profile
Contribution Amount:Please Select $50 $100 $250Otheror $
and on abortion, from emily’s list own site (pressroom)
In only ten election cycles, EMILY’s List has helped elect hundreds of pro-choice Democratic women to federal office, state legislatures, state constitutional offices and other key local offices.
Women we helped elect…..
(more facts from their site)..list of women they claim to have elected
http://www.emilyslist.org/news.....ected.html
ps, not a conservative on there; just Loretta, Maxine, Lynn, Jolene, Maria..
The cost of the Iraqi war: Why not just take the cost of the war out in Iraqi sweet crude? [plus 10%] Who will stop us??
righton@92: the Republicans I know don’t support women candidates, even conservative ones. Republican women don’t support women candidates, and neither do republican men. By and large the GOP, and especially conservatives, don’t support women candidates at all, let alone enthusiastically enough for them to win. The women candidates supported by conservatives/GOP are few and far between.
So…if you don’t like who Emily’s list supports, develop your own list designed to support conservative women candidates. It’s not our responsibiility to do that for you. Do it for yourself. There’s plenty of cash in the GOP to do their own Emily’s list (maybe the BIAW would do it, do you think?) and support women candidates of their choice. But that probably ain’t gonna happen, is it.
marilyn, sure you take us for fools..
You mean Jennife Dunn got no money from men? No votes from Republican men? You want a list of 5 more, 10 more, 50 more?
Spin baby, you guys hate the light of the truth
Cantwell got rich by favors, then bailed out by favors
She’s just as beholden to rich, liberal women as some GOP guy might be to Robertson..
Righton@96: You said: “You mean….” I told you what I meant, or can’t you read? Or can’t you listen? The operative phrase is “By and large”. to repeat: By and large, the GOP, especially conservatives don’t support women candidates. Sure, there are some who do. However, given any other option, most don’t. And.. I’ll bet, dollar for dollar, and encouragement for encouragement, I have supported more women candidates, conservative or progressive, than you have. In fact, dollar for dollar, encouragement for encouragement, I have supported more conservative women candidates than most conservataive women have. I value women candidates; I appreciate the energy and courage it takes for them to run; women canddates are not the default choice and they need the extra encouragement to run. So, I support good candidates, and by good candidates, I mean those who put a premium on public service and integrity in office. Emily’s list is about supporting good candidates. If most of the checks coming in to Emily’s List are in support of Democratic candidates it tells me that Democrats, men and women, are more likely to support women candidates. I don’t think that is quite true of Republicans.
And..yeah, I support male candidates, as well.
Is that too hard for you…baby?
marilyn,
try it on some other dummy….
You started with “the Republicans I know don’t support women candidates, even conservative ones. Republican women don’t support women candidates, and neither do republican men. ”
Only after that did you get to your famous by and large.
Back to McGAvick and that woman who owes her financial well being to Emily’s list ….Emily’s list is a left wing, woman only, funding outfit.
Next you’re going to tell me NPR is fair and balanced., right.
So..righton@96: have you started your own Emily’s list yet? Are you going to? Why don’t you suggest it to the GOP? Are you going to support Condi? Or are you just going to whine about Maria?
Comment by Smokin’ In The Boy’s Room— 12/8/05 @ 9:39 am
“You should be horsewhipped and thrown to the dogs.”
I thought Democrats were against torture.
righton@98: “try it on some other dummy”. Why would I want to do that, you’re my favorite dummy.
Why do you care if Emily’s list is a “left wing, woman only, funding outfit”? I don’t know, or care, if they are “fair and balanced” – they’re not the Supreme Court. I care about advancing good candidates and I’ll send them a check in support of a candidate I like.
Back to McGavick/Cantwell. What is your point, exactly? Is it that all politicians are beholden to someone? McGavick to Safeco and Maria to rich liberal women? Are you saying that the GOP can’t(or won’t) compete with Emily’s list to advance their own women candidates? Why don’t you suggest that to the GOP? Or, I suggest again, maybe the BIAW would develop the list. Or, gosh, start your own list righton, and watch those checks just roll in!
“Of course, this does raise a bit of hypothetical question… if Safeco pays McGavick $4.5 million to leave the company and run for the Senate, and then McGavick puts, say, $4.5 million of his own money into his campaign… how is this not a clever bit of money laundering designed to get around the campaign finance laws? Hypothetically.”
If this is true, then I’m sure we can expect you, Goldy, to call for Maria Cantwell’s resignation and Rob Glazer’s arrest for his financing of her campaign…
marilyn
I could give a rat’s a** what gender the person is. Yeah, mostly its men but that’s happenstandce to me as the voter. I voted Jennifer Dunn about 3x, and had no problem doing so.
How come you guys keep electing white males like McDermott?
Marilyn @ 95
the Republicans I know don’t support women candidates, even conservative ones.
Funny that Texas finds their senior Senator so popular…
Smokin’ In The Boy’s Room (AKA headless lucy, Harry Poon, and/or Lush Flimbaugh) @82
Goddamn!
What kind of sick, twisted shut in asshole would actually pay to eat at the same table with that fat Nazi pig-fucker Sharkansky?
No, I have no comment other than the credible names of your alias.
Smokin’ In The Boy’s Room (AKA headless lucy, Harry Poon, and/or Lush Flimbaugh) @84
ConservativeFirst.
You stupid asshole.
This fucking neocon war of yours is costing hundreds of billions dollars and hundreds of thousands of lives, and you want to know if the cost is inflation-adjusted?
Fuck you, you fucking moron.
You should be horsewhipped and thrown to the dogs.
As before, no comment…
Marks
Its all politics…we like any flavor of Senator w/ our politics.
Same for libs, except they are playing the propaganda game well.
Back to polls—SV’s most recent:
Below are the results of a three-day poll of registered voters in the state of Washington. Results are based on telephone interviews with 800 registered voters in Washington, aged 18+, and conducted December 2-4, 2005. The margin of sampling error is ±3 percentage points.
1. Do you approve or disapprove of Governor Christine Gregoire’s job performance?
Approve 37%
Disapprove 55%
Undecided 8%
6. If the Election for Governor in 2008 was between the Democrat Christine Gregoire and the Republican, Dino Rossi, whom would you vote for?
Dino Rossi 54%
Christine Gregoire 35%
Undecided 11%
Back to polls—SV’s most recent:
Below are the results of a three-day poll of registered voters in the state of Washington. Results are based on telephone interviews with 800 registered voters in Washington, aged 18+, and conducted December 2-4, 2005. The margin of sampling error is ±3 percentage points.
1. Do you approve or disapprove of Governor Christine Gregoire’s job performance?
Approve 37%
Disapprove 55%
Undecided 8%
6. If the Election for Governor in 2008 was between the Democrat Christine Gregoire and the Republican, Dino Rossi, whom would you vote for?
Dino Rossi 54%
Christine Gregoire 35%
Undecided 11%
righton,
It is not a matter of propaganda. Each party engages in the timeless tradition of “My party is better than yours is.”
There is, however, a big disconnect in the individuals of the party (either one). Where marilyn screws up is her penchant to associate specifically with her like-minded party members. If she were wise, she would broaden her scope a bit and find out what life is like beyond her skewed vision of humanity.
marks@107: marks, explain that frothy blather you state in 107.
What is YOUR life like beyond YOUR skewed vision of humanity?
I bet it rally sucks, doesn’t it? Marilyn