Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

Charlie Crist flip flops on Sarah Palin

The problem for Charlie Crist as an indy has always been that his Republican past -- and his long string of public statements in favor of GOP positions and politicians -- have made it impossible for him to marshall the most effective arguments against Marco Rubio without Crist looking like a flip-flopper and an opportunist.

Case in point: Crist's closing ad. In a clear effort to make some noise, he takes a shot at Sarah Palin, claiming a vote for Rubio is a vote for the 'Cuda and the Tea Party.

The problem is that Crist is already on record saying two years ago that Palin would make a great President.

Here's Crist's new ad, which warns against "extremism" and claims it's "the road Sarah Palin, the Tea Party and Marco Rubio want to take us down":

Which would be a fine message if Crist hadn't claimed in October of 2008 that Palin is "ready" to be president if something were to happen to John McCain, and would even "do a great job" because she's the "only executive that's running":

This is more than just a gotcha. Dems warned that Crist wouldn't be able to make the transition to indy for precisely this reason -- and that only a real Dem would be able to make an effective case against Rubio. Of course, Crist and Kendrick Meek are splitting the Dem vote, which means we may be saying hello to Senator-elect Marco Rubio in less than a week.

Have we just witnessed Charlie Crist's final flip flop?

By Greg Sargent  | October 27, 2010; 2:10 PM ET
Categories:  2010 elections, Independents, Senate Dems, Senate Republicans  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Do you want to live in "Sharron Angle's Nevada"?
Next: Foes ran $100 million in ads against health care -- after it passed

Comments

At this point I honestly think that I'd rather have Rubio than Crist.

Crist is the only reason Kendrick Meek isn't the runaway winner in this election.

And I'm really beginning to think it was a strategic ploy by Crist and the RPOF to hand the victory to Rubio.

Posted by: Ethan2010 | October 27, 2010 2:14 PM | Report abuse

"Crist is the only reason Kendrick Meek isn't the runaway winner in this election."

(giggle) Even from California I can smell the BS...

Related: "CNN: Sink lied about debate cheating"

"Today she said she wasn’t sure what it was when the makeup artist handed her the phone. She thought it might have been a message from a daughter... But we listened very closely to the audio, and the makeup artist, when she approached Alex Sink, said I have a message from the staff."

"Cheating in the debate was bad enough. Now Sink has lied about it publicly, and fired a staffer to cover up her own mistake."

http://hotair.com/archives/2010/10/27/cnn-sink-lied-about-debate-cheating/

Posted by: sbj3 | October 27, 2010 2:20 PM | Report abuse

Yes, it's a flip flop that will be used against him but it's hardly suprising that he felt somewhat compelled to support McCain's VP choice. Also, I don't think it's unreasonable for him to claim that his view of her has severely diminished over the last two years. In Oct 2008, many in Alaska and throughout the country had a much more favorable impression of her (given her moderate governing style in Alaska and her convention performance) and did not realize the extent of her extremism and temperamental unfitness.

Posted by: wswest | October 27, 2010 2:21 PM | Report abuse

SBJ,

Where's the evidence that she cheated?

Posted by: Ethan2010 | October 27, 2010 2:25 PM | Report abuse

Scarbourough and Mika were basking in Rubio's "courage" of coming out saying he will work in a bi-partisan manner, or something to that extent.

I guess he hasn't read the McConnell memo yet.

Posted by: mikefromArlington | October 27, 2010 2:26 PM | Report abuse

@ethan: "Where's the evidence that she cheated?"

Err - the audio tape?

"We listened very closely to the audio, and the makeup artist, when she approached Alex Sink, said I have a message from the staff."

The message on the cell phone?

"It was on a cell phone, it was two sentences. It was essentially advice after the last segment of the debate telling her if that question comes up again, remember this, and be more aggressive when Rick Scott questions you. It was two sentences."

Posted by: sbj3 | October 27, 2010 2:28 PM | Report abuse

Right, so she looked at the message.

But the topic didn't come up after the break. So how is that cheating?

It's not like she plead the 5th 75 times about her involvement in massive corporate fraud.

Posted by: Ethan2010 | October 27, 2010 2:35 PM | Report abuse

Mike,

Of course Rubio will courageously work in a bi-partisan manner. He will work with the Republicans and Ben Nelson to defeat anything Obama proposes. Thanks to Ben Nelson, Republicans can be bi-partisan while remaining in full compliance with their primary goal of denying Obama a second term.

Posted by: bearclaw1 | October 27, 2010 2:35 PM | Report abuse

sbj - This is the text message that is causing the uproar:

"The attorney on Sykes suit said Alex did nothing wrong. Tell not to let him keep talking about her."

Was that at all relevant to the debate? I'm asking, I didn't watch it, but it seems irrelevant to me. If she was going to cheat wouldn’t she have asked for some sort of data that would help her in some way? Say, the unemployment rate in Florida, or maybe the total amount her opponent stole from Medicare, or maybe the number of times her opponent had to take the fifth under oath (75 times.)

Posted by: nisleib | October 27, 2010 2:37 PM | Report abuse

She cheated by having contact with her staff during the debate. Doesn't matter what the message said or if it helped.

Then she compounded it by saying she thought it might have been a message from her daughter when the audio shows she was told it was a message from her staff before she looked at the message.

Posted by: sbj3 | October 27, 2010 2:41 PM | Report abuse

Not only that, but the stylist said she had a message from staff. That message could have been about anything.

As Sink has said, her daughter was traveling in Europe and it could have been a note from her.

It's not like the stylist said, "I have advice for you in the debate." And then she looked. No. That's not what happened.

Point being, it's just a silly diversion. Floridians know not to trust a crook with their taxpayer money.

"She cheated by having contact with her staff during the debate."

Oh really? Is that the rule?

Haha. Mkay. Making stuff up now. That's not the rule. THIS is the rule:

"The agreement required that the candidates would not have opening or closing statements and would not use notes or props."

She didn't use notes or props. Thus, no cheating. Case closed.

Posted by: Ethan2010 | October 27, 2010 2:44 PM | Report abuse

Greg,

Come on. That is not much of a flip flop. Crist was backing John McCain for President, and Palin was his running mate. Of course he had to say that Palin was qualified. What was he supposed to do; endorse McCain, but also say that Palin was not qualified, which would make McCain unqualified, since he picked her for the VP slot?

Also; Palin was a sitting Governor back then. Crist had no way of foreseen that she would turn into a quitter. So he can claim that her more recent history, since the 2008 election, has forced him to change his opinion of her worthiness, to be elected to any future high level executive office.

Posted by: Liam-still | October 27, 2010 2:45 PM | Report abuse

I read that the message Sink received was "Blue heron loves Anacott Steel."

Posted by: TrollMcWingnut | October 27, 2010 2:46 PM | Report abuse

Crist is an egocentric SOB, who should have just skulked away when the GOP turned their back on him,otherwise Meek would have had a real shot. Now Barack can give Charlie an Ambassador post somewhere where he can maintain his tan.
Can someone here from FLA explain why Scott, a cadaverous Medicare fraud with the wild Bachmann eyes, has a chance to become Governor in a state where I would think most seniors would find him anathema. Is Alex Sink the second coming of Martha Coakley or what?

Posted by: filmnoia | October 27, 2010 2:46 PM | Report abuse

"Can someone here from FLA explain why Scott, a cadaverous Medicare fraud with the wild Bachmann eyes, has a chance to become Governor"

He has spent a bazillion dollars of his tainted fraud money on scare ads.

That's literally the only reason.

Posted by: Ethan2010 | October 27, 2010 2:49 PM | Report abuse

Let me get this straight ... Scott's companies have defrauded the government for millions of dollars ... Scott invoked his right against self-incrimination 75 times in one deposition in one of the many lawsuits filed against him and his companies ... Sink is handed a phone after being told there is a message from her staff ... and ...

sbj?

Posted by: pragmaticstill | October 27, 2010 2:50 PM | Report abuse

Liam, the broader point, obviously, was that Crist's indy bid was doomed because of his long history of stuff like this.

Posted by: Greg Sargent | October 27, 2010 2:52 PM | Report abuse

Edit:

Crist had no way of foreseeing that she would turn into a quitter.

Sorry for the wrong choice of words. I think I may have contracted an outbreak of Kevin Willis Gout By Proxy.

Posted by: Liam-still | October 27, 2010 2:52 PM | Report abuse

Q: Have we just witnessed Charlie Crist's final flip flop?


A 1: I doubt it. As much as he flip flops I'll be amazed if Romney doesn't choose him as a running mate.

A 2: No, nothing can stop him from flip flopping. When he dies he'll have to get a coffin with enough room to roll over in. If he is cremated his ashes will show up on Ghost Hunters with the tag, "Twitchiest Ashes Ever."

Posted by: nisleib | October 27, 2010 2:53 PM | Report abuse

@ethan: "Haha. Mkay. Making stuff up now."

Not quite, Ethan. Here's some help for ya!

"Democrat Alex Sink fired a campaign aide after tonight’s CNN gubernatorial debate, admitting her campaign broke the rules by passing her a message during a commercial break."
====
Let's just repeat that bit:

"admitting her campaign broke the rules"
=======
"Sink released this statement afterward:

"After the debate tonight, one of my campaign advisors admitted he tried to communicate with me during one of the breaks... It violated a debate agreement and I immediately removed him from the campaign."
===
Let's repeat that bit:

"It violated a debate agreement."
=============
Let's help Ethan out a bit more.

Sink said: "Well, uh, what happened was, Chris, last night that the makeup artist held up her phone and said I just got this message, I don’t know who it’s from."

But, in truth, per CNN, the makeup artist actually told Sink that she had a message from the staff.
=====
A little more help for Ethan? Here's what the moderator of the debate wrote after the debate:

"If you watched the debate, you may have noted Rick Scott accusing the Alex Sink campaign of slipping her a note against the rules. He's correct."

http://www.postonpolitics.com/2010/10/sink-fires-campaign-aide-over-debate-rules-breach/

Posted by: sbj3 | October 27, 2010 2:56 PM | Report abuse

"Have we just witnessed Charlie Crist's final flip flop?"

Yes.

P.S. to pragmaticstill (last time I will ask, I promise): please name even one Obama judiciary nominee who has not taken the bench?

Posted by: JakeD2 | October 27, 2010 2:56 PM | Report abuse

"He has spent a bazillion dollars of his tainted fraud money on scare ads."

But Scott is so damn scary looking. And here you have well paid hacks like David Brooks say that the amount of money spent in elections really doesn't have an impact. Scare ads seem to work especially well on the gullibility of senior citizens.
Gullible seniors are the same demographic that criminal contractors and tradesman exploit.

Posted by: filmnoia | October 27, 2010 2:57 PM | Report abuse

JakeD2 | October 27, 2010 2:56 PM

WASHINGTON — A determined Republican stall campaign in the Senate has sidetracked so many of the men and women nominated by President Barack Obama for judgeships that he has put fewer people on the bench than any president since Richard Nixon at a similar point in his first term 40 years ago.

The delaying tactics have proved so successful, despite the Democrats' substantial Senate majority, that fewer than half of Obama's nominees have been confirmed and 102 out of 854 judgeships are vacant.

Forty-seven of those vacancies have been labeled emergencies by the judiciary because of heavy caseloads.

Even some Republican senators have complained. Sen. Lamar Alexander took to the Senate floor in July to plead with his own leaders for a vote on an appeals court judge supported by Alexander and fellow Tennessee Republican Sen. Bob Corker.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/09/06/obama-judicial-appointees_n_706590.html

Posted by: nisleib | October 27, 2010 3:01 PM | Report abuse

@prag: "sbj?"

What's the question?

Posted by: sbj3 | October 27, 2010 3:02 PM | Report abuse

I don't think Charlie Crist meant it when he said Sarah Palin was qualified to be President. But whether he meant it or not is irrelevant to whether he is a flip-flopper.

And no, nisleib, there is no way Romney would pick Crist as a running mate. If Romney can even survive the craze-fest that will be the Republican Presidential primaries to claim the nomination, the party would never accept him picking a "traitor" to the party as a VP nominee. (Note: this is slightly different than Al Gore, whose running mate didn't betray his party until later).

Posted by: bearclaw1 | October 27, 2010 3:02 PM | Report abuse

nisleib,

My "snark" meter probably wasn't correctly calibrated. It occurs to me you likely weren't serious about Romney picking Crist as a running mate. Apologies.

Posted by: bearclaw1 | October 27, 2010 3:04 PM | Report abuse

Greg,

You picked a very weak piece of metal to shape the final nail in his coffin. He was endorsing McCain, which meant backing the ticket. That is all it was. We have to allow politicians some latitude in campaign season. I hate when either side latches on to some minuscule pimple, and devotes hours on end trying to turn it into a mountain.

Can we pivot away from obsessing over the insignificant gotcha crap for the few remaining days, before election day, please.

We will have all the time in the world to devote to all that rubbish, after the election has been held.

Reality Check.

Meeks has no chance of winning; so we should want Crist to defeat Rubio.

Posted by: Liam-still | October 27, 2010 3:04 PM | Report abuse

But Scott is so damn scary looking.

****

I was thinking that last night! He looks like a cross between Lex Luthor and Rudy Guliani.

Not that his appearance matters. The fact that he is a crook who had to take the 5th 75 times does, however, matter.

Posted by: nisleib | October 27, 2010 3:05 PM | Report abuse

nisleib,

My "snark" meter probably wasn't correctly calibrated. It occurs to me you likely weren't serious about Romney picking Crist as a running mate. Apologies.

*******

No worries, the internets don't do inflection. And yes, I was trying to be funny.

Posted by: nisleib | October 27, 2010 3:09 PM | Report abuse

I know you like to find little right wing snippets to post here to get our lefty goats but the question is, are you saying that this apparent mistake by Sink's staff indicates to you that she is more dishonest than Scott?

More generally, what is your point?

Posted by: pragmaticstill | October 27, 2010 3:09 PM | Report abuse

@Prag: "I know you like to find little right wing snippets to post here to get our lefty goats but the question is, are you saying that this apparent mistake by Sink's staff indicates to you that she is more dishonest than Scott? More generally, what is your point?"

If you'll check my first post, my intent was to bring other Florida political news to the attention of Plum Line readers.

Then, a couple of commentors tried to defend her actions and say she didn't break the rules. I felt obligated to document the absurdity of those lies.

I make no judgment as to who is "more dishonest" and, in general, my point is to highlight the hypocrisy of the left.

Posted by: sbj3 | October 27, 2010 3:17 PM | Report abuse

@Prag: "This apparent mistake by Sink's staff."

Cute. This is what I am talking about. You are smarter than this and are being disingenuous. This was not a "mistake by the staff" - this was a lie by Sink:

"Well, uh, what happened was, Chris, last night that the makeup artist held up her phone and said I just got this message, I don’t know who it’s from."

"But, in truth, per CNN, the makeup artist actually told Sink that she had a message from the staff."

Posted by: sbj3 | October 27, 2010 3:21 PM | Report abuse

Rules are rules. Ms. Sink fired the staff member involved, so clearly Ms. Sink has agreed that there was a violation. She has demonstrated accountability, so there is no need for us to try and put lipstick on the screw up.

No big deal. Get back to the important policy differences between the two candidates please.

Posted by: Liam-still | October 27, 2010 3:23 PM | Report abuse

@Ethan & Greg "Crist is the only reason Kendrick Meek isn't the runaway winner in this election."

As a native of the Sunshine state I sadly have to disagree. Crist has many independents...like me...as well as moderate R's. If Crist was not in the race Kendrick would still not win. Golden boy Marco..the teflon Speaker of the HOuse who gave away the state of Florida to the special intereste quadrupling his income in the process...has always polled in the 40% range. Remember the teahadists are not arguing facts or thinking with their heads this year...that 40% is ROCK SOLID.
If you split Crist's 20+% the disaffected R's would have returned to Rubio. The ONLY way to keep Rubio out of the Senate would have been a Meek withdrawal and endorsement of Crist...no Dem would vote for right wing Marco.

BTW Because he faced no real challenge..Marco has quietly tacked to the right center and has run almost no attack ads focusing instead on the warmer gentler Marco. It will disgust me to have him represent our state, he is another right wing snake oil salesman...but he is a very good campaigner.

Posted by: rukidding7 | October 27, 2010 3:27 PM | Report abuse

LOL nice job nisleib. No response yet from Joke. Interesting.

Posted by: Observer691 | October 27, 2010 3:29 PM | Report abuse

Yes sbj, and the message could have been something about her daughter who is travelling in Europe. Give me a break, this was no lie.

And as for "the hypocrisy of the left" could you please be a little more specific about what you are highlighting here?

Posted by: pragmaticstill | October 27, 2010 3:30 PM | Report abuse

nisleib and observer,

Jake is a sophist. I can tell you what is response(s) will be.

First, Jake will note that nisleib didn't "name" any judicial nominee, and that was the challenge.

Second, Jake will claim that delaying is not the same as keeping the nominee from taking the bench. In other words, the Republicans haven't voted down any of these judicial nominees. Which, of course, is precisely the point of their tactic: they don't have the votes (yet) to stop the judicial nominations, so they use "holds" to keep those votes from occurring. Seems to me I recall Republican Senators who once thought an "up or down vote" on a judicial nominee was pretty much the most important business before the Senate.

Posted by: bearclaw1 | October 27, 2010 3:34 PM | Report abuse

@SBJ And you my fine California friend are to be congratulated. You have earned today's Q.Beck sophisty of the day award!!!
Yeahhhh

"I felt obligated to document the absurdity of those lies."

You felt OBLIGATED? Puhhleeze. The "absurdity of those lies." Wow hyperbole much? In sports this is called no harm no foul! In other words a TECHNICAL violation of the rules that does NOT EFFECT the outcome of the contest is never flagged or called.

You need to butt out of this. Florida is facing a huge crisis thanks to YOUR republican party which has nominated a divisive crook...not hyperbole...CROOK!
Fraud...do you comprehend SBJ.

Listen I like you and don't wish to be rude, crude, or mean spirited where you are concerned...but stay away from anything to do with Scott even POSSIBLY gaining our Governors mansion. This man makes the banker in "It's a Wonderful Life" look like Mother Teresa. He makes the Grinch look like Gandhi...and none of this is hyperbole. He is simply the most disgusting human being to sleaze up out of the ooze in a long long time. IF it wasn't for Carl Paladino Scott would be the poster boy for Republican IGNORANCE in their nominees. O'Donnell, Angle are simply unqualified morons...Scott made his bucks firing so many employees that it literally brought on network tv reports about how HCA was not providing adequate healthcare...

Just know SBJ you should do a far better job of picking your spots to feel OBLIGATED. Sink acknowledge this was a violation and immediately fired the man who made the call. Did it effect the debate...not one iota!

SBJ lay down with dogs and get up with fleas. Dude you are going to need a long bath and lots of powder!!!

Posted by: rukidding7 | October 27, 2010 3:39 PM | Report abuse

@ruk: I *have* heard that many conservatives don't like Scott.

Hypocrisy isn't the right word but this is what I don't get about some of y'all on the left: If I point out that Sink is lying then that doesn't mean I am endorsing her opponent. I don't understand why anyone here who claims to not be a partisan would consistently jump to defend a Democrat when they are clearly wrong. Many of the conservative posters here (with some notable exceptions) are quite willing to admit when a GOP candidate has their flaws. In this post, at least, I don't sense the same willingness from Ethan or nisleib or, now, from you.

Posted by: sbj3 | October 27, 2010 3:48 PM | Report abuse

This is actually sad and funny - O'Donnell interview goes bad so she threatens to sue radio station if the interview is posted on the website:

The fireworks begin a bit more than halfway through, when Jensen discussed O'Donnell attacks on Democratic nominee Chris Coons's record as New Castle County Executive. Jensen pointed out the pluses of Coons's leadership -- the tax increases were fairly small in the face of a massive revenue shortfall after the subprime collapse, and he negotiated tough deals with the public employee unions -- and asked O'Donnell what tax and spending decisions she would have done differently.

O'Donnell became unable to give specifics at a certain point, and the subject became only more heated as callers continued asking, as well. O'Donnell repeatedly insisted that she was running for Senate, not for county council, while Jensen countered that she was criticizing Coons on the basis of his county performance.

O'Donnell's campaign manager Matt Moran called and threatened to "crush" the station with a lawsuit. An attorney for O'Donnell's campaign then contacted the station's lawyers to ask that the video not be released.

http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2010/10/radio-station-odonnell-threatened-to-sue-us-forposting-an-interview-online.php?ref=fpa

Posted by: pragmaticstill | October 27, 2010 3:53 PM | Report abuse

prag,

More sad than funny. Kind of like a three-legged dog in a greyhound race.

At least until Fox gives her a $2 million contract.

Posted by: bearclaw1 | October 27, 2010 4:01 PM | Report abuse

Many of the conservative posters here (with some notable exceptions) are quite willing to admit when a GOP candidate has their flaws.

Posted by: sbj3 | October 27, 2010 3:48 PM

Just one example of this would be helpful, sbj. Even yesterday's head stomping was greeted by the right posters as having some justification. You, sbj, in protest of Greg's postings on the incoherence of Sharron Angle decided to contribute to her campaign.

Posted by: pragmaticstill | October 27, 2010 4:02 PM | Report abuse

All, check out the amazing amount of money that was spent in ads just to attack health care reform, after it passed into law:

http://wapo.st/b1AHJi

Posted by: Greg Sargent | October 27, 2010 4:12 PM | Report abuse

@SBJ "I don't understand why anyone here who claims to not be a partisan would consistently jump to defend a Democrat when they are clearly wrong."

I understand but you've just selected the most minute technicality to jump on here...I have yet to read the first poster who jumped up to defend Alvin Greene in S.C. I deplore Jim Demented...I consider him to be what is wrong with our current political system...as much as I dislike Demented I can't honestly suggest that Greene should beat him.

The sad truth SBJ if you are objective is that the tea party phenemenon has produced an amazing number of idiots this year..and they ALL are running as Republicans.

I do not support Meg Whitman or Carly Fiorina...but at least they have demonstrated intelligence, command of the issues, and are obviously qualified for the offices they seek. I simply disagree with them on policy. Alas the R's are stuck with a lot of "Alvin Greenes" this year. And personally I do try to differentiate...Scott is not unintelligent, he obviously is very very successful at enriching HIMSELF..Joe Miller is much smarter than Sarah Palin IMHO...but like her he has some serious ethical issues and some really far out positions...I can't say I'm a big fan of Murkowski but she again is at least qualified.

I'm not and I don't believe any other progressive poster has defended Charlie Rangell. I don't really know enough about Maxine Waters case but if she is guilty..I'd throw her under the bus as well. And in fact at the risk of offending one of my favorite posters, one of the reasons I had trouble getting fired up about Kendrick Meek is because of the ethical questions surrounding his family..his mother the Congresswoman.

In short it obviously sounds partisan, but THIS YEAR...I believe the R's...because of the tea party have nominated far more idiots, crooks and losers than the Dems. Alas some of them are going to get elected. When the wave washes up it sometimes leaves junk and flotsam on the shore.

Posted by: rukidding7 | October 27, 2010 4:15 PM | Report abuse

@ruk: "...but he is a very good campaigner."

Indeed. I called it several weeks ago (to much pshawing, I might ad) that Rubio takes it. But I think Rick Scott loses. While my batting average is no better than 50/50, that should still make you happy, Ruk. The "Rick Scott loses" part, I mean. ;)

Posted by: Kevin_Willis | October 27, 2010 4:16 PM | Report abuse

Crist is creeping into his dotage, and losing his train of thought. An old mullet like him can't swim with the Barracuda.

Posted by: bubbasouth | October 27, 2010 4:18 PM | Report abuse

BTW, Ruk would have me persuaded against Scott as is, however, the Scott campaign making a big deal about a text message at a debate . . . aw, jeeze, Louise. Really? Really? This is what proves Alex Sink is unfit to govern? A text message?

That being said, her attempt to lie (pointlessly) struck me as vaguely O'Donnellish. I'm assuming she doesn't have a LinkedIn profile.

Posted by: Kevin_Willis | October 27, 2010 4:22 PM | Report abuse

@Prags: Sigh - why do I bother?

"Just one example of this would be helpful, sbj."

I've refused to defend O'Donnell. I posted at length about my problems with Meg Whitman. I criticized Angle for not having the courage of her convictions when confronted by that student.

"Even yesterday's head stomping was greeted by the right posters as having some justification."

But others - Kevin, QB - condemned the stomping. (Speaking of that, if I now post a link that shows the stompee is not being completely honest, will you accuse me of endorsing abuse?)

http://www.redstate.com/rs_insider/2010/10/27/exclusive-video-lauren-valle-before-the-head-stomp-vid/

"You, sbj, in protest of Greg's postings on the incoherence of Sharron Angle decided to contribute to her campaign."

No, I decided to contribute to even the playing field based on Greg's outright advocating on behalf of Reid. When Greg has merely reported on the race - which he has been doing lately - I have not contributed.

Posted by: sbj3 | October 27, 2010 4:28 PM | Report abuse

"In this post, at least, I don't sense the same willingness from Ethan or nisleib or, now, from you."

Maybe it's because we don't think the "flaw" you speak of is in fact not a flaw.

If you take what Hot Air says as gospel, then who the heck are you to speak about "flaws"?

What a joke. Alex Sink is human. That's her flaw. Rick Scott was involved in massive medicare fraud at a for-profit corporation and he has covered it up like it's nothing. That's his flaw. If the two are the same to you, then I assert that you clearly don't know the meaning of the word "flaw" or you are disingenuously comparing apples to oranges. What makes it worse is that you are not just defending any old person with whom you happen to agree. You are defending someone with Rick Scott's despicable track record of participating in the scamming his own government for no purpose other than enriching his corporation and enriching himself. That, SBJ, is truly contemptible.

Posted by: Ethan2010 | October 27, 2010 4:35 PM | Report abuse

Edit:

"Maybe it's because we think that the "flaw" you speak of is in fact not a flaw."

Posted by: Ethan2010 | October 27, 2010 4:40 PM | Report abuse

@ethan: I'm worried about you.

Posted by: sbj3 | October 27, 2010 4:44 PM | Report abuse

@ethan: I'm worried about you.

Posted by: sbj3 | October 27, 2010 4:57 PM | Report abuse

When Greg has merely reported on the race - which he has been doing lately - I have not contributed.

Posted by: sbj3 | October 27, 2010 4:28 PM

As I recall, you decided to quit posting after it was reported she raised $14 million. In any event, why would you want to level the playing field for an obvious lunatic?

Posted by: pragmaticstill | October 27, 2010 5:27 PM | Report abuse

@sbj:

Worried about me? Yeah right. I find your false "concern" and mockery of my well being to be personally insulting.

Posted by: Ethan2010 | October 27, 2010 5:34 PM | Report abuse

@pragmatic: "O'Donnell became unable to give specifics at a certain point, and the subject became only more heated as callers continued asking, as well. O'Donnell repeatedly insisted that she was running for Senate, not for county council, while Jensen countered that she was criticizing Coons on the basis of his county performance. O'Donnell's campaign manager Matt Moran called and threatened to 'crush' the station with a lawsuit. An attorney for O'Donnell's campaign then contacted the station's lawyers to ask that the video not be released."

I bet Karl Rove is feeling pretty smug right about now. I know I would be. ;)

Posted by: Kevin_Willis | October 27, 2010 5:45 PM | Report abuse

@sbj: Now, you're mocking Ethan, too?

There sure is a lot of mockery going on around here.

http://snltranscripts.jt.org/88/88jmockme.phtml

"The insolence and bold effrontery!"

Posted by: Kevin_Willis | October 27, 2010 5:48 PM | Report abuse

@kevin: That was pretty funny. I like this bit:

"Yes, yes! The crescent moon lets its lunar contempt be seen for what it is - a brazen canopy of affrontary! Thomas?

Servant #2: Oh, yes, yes, of course! The impudence of the moon's bold audacity!"

Posted by: sbj3 | October 27, 2010 6:12 PM | Report abuse

nisleib:

Thank you for the link. However, the only nominee for the federal bench named in that article, Jane Stranch, was indeed given an "up or down" vote September 13, unlike the following GWB nominees, all blocked by the Dems:

William E. Smith, Loretta A. Preska, Shalom D. Stone, Claude Allen, Rod J. Rosenstein, Terrence Boyle, Robert J. Conrad, Steve A. Matthews, William J. Haynes, II, E. Duncan Getchell, Glen E. Conrad, Charles W. Pickering, Henry Saad, Philip P. Simon, Carolyn Kuhl, William Gerry Myers III, James H. Payne, William H. Steele, Miguel Estrada, Brett Kavanaugh, Peter Keisler, Lincoln D. Almond, Mary Donohue, Thomas Marcelle, Carolyn P. Short, Gene E. K. Pratter, Paul S. Diamond, Carolyn P. Short, Paul S. Diamond, Colm F. Connolly, Thomas Alvin Farr, David J. Novak, William J. Powell, David R. Dugas, J. Richard Barry, Daniel P. Ryan, Gustavus Adolphus Puryear, John J. Tharp, J. Mac Davis, James Edward Rogan, Frederick W. Rohlfing III, Gregory E. Goldberg, Richard H. Honaker, William F. Jung, Jeffrey Adam Rosen, and Michael E. O'Neill.

Susan Bieke Neilson was only confirmed three months prior to her death, after a four-year battle over her nomination. Eventually, Bush declined to make nominations for 23 other current or future federal district judgeships in the 110th Congress rather than incur further Democratic obstruction.

Quite a difference, don't you think?

Now, the reason I even asked "pragmaticstill" if he / she could name a single Obama nominee who has not taken the bench is because of this comment on an earlier thread:

"Does the right think that the Federal Courts that already have a shortage of judges due to GOP obstruction should devote all of their resources to deportation cases resulting from traffic stops and housing code violations?"

Posted by: pragmaticstill | October 27, 2010 10:32 AM

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/plum-line/2010/10/the_morning_plum_121.html#comments

First, it should go without saying that no one is advocating that judges devote all of their resources to deportation cases resulting from traffic stops and housing code violations. Second, if there is a "shortage" it is primarily because of the DEMOCRATS refusing to fill those spots, not the Republicans. Most of those spots wouldn't even be available for Obama to nominate otherwise.

In addition, YOUR own article noted that "Obama has nominated roughly 40 fewer people for judgeships than either Bush or Clinton at this point. The smaller number of nominees has been a surprise because Obama once taught constitutional law and installed a team with vast experience nominating and confirming judges.

"It seems like it has not been a priority," said Ilya Shapiro, senior fellow at the libertarian Cato Institute in Washington. "It's been surprising because he's a constitutional lawyer, he knows how courts work, how important they are. It seemed like an easy bone to throw to his base to make a mark, a lasting mark."

Posted by: JakeD2 | October 27, 2010 7:42 PM | Report abuse

bearclaw1:

Sorry to prove your prediction about my "sophist" response wrong.

Back on topic: I do believe that Charlie Crist meant it when he said that Sarah Palin was qualified to be President (he has interacted with her personally via the National Republican Governors' Association). But, he realizes that the last chance he has to pick up some votes at least is to trash Gov. Palin now. At least you got one thing right: whether he meant it or not is irrelevant to whether he is a flip-flopper.

Now, whether Barack Obama is qualified to be President, that's a whole other thread ; )

Posted by: JakeD2 | October 27, 2010 7:53 PM | Report abuse

Post a Comment

We encourage users to analyze, comment on and even challenge washingtonpost.com's articles, blogs, reviews and multimedia features.

User reviews and comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions.




characters remaining

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company