Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

Dino Rossi backs repeal of Wall Street reform

By Felicia Sonmez

Former state Sen. Dino Rossi (R) said today that he would support repealing the financial regulatory reform law, becoming the first candidate this cycle to advocate for doing away with the measure.

"I think we should," Rossi said when asked in an appearance on the ABC/Washington Post "Top Line" program whether he'd support repealing the law. He charged that the measure, which President Barack Obama signed into law last week, will reduce the amount of money that small businesses have available; Rossi also argued that it "created six super banks and left Fannie [Mae] and Freddie [Mac], which were at the epicenter of the problem, out of the deal."

Democrats quickly cast Rossi's statement as indicative of the candidate's "loyalty to big banks over Washington families." Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee spokeswoman Deirdre Murphy charged that Rossi "is out of step with Washington values and not on the side of consumers in his state."

Rossi, who made two unsuccessful bids against Gov. Christine Gregoire (D) in 2004 and 2008, is currently making his third run for higher office, challenging three-term incumbent Sen. Patty Murray (D). He is the preferred candidate of the National Republican Senatorial Committee, which has bought $515,000 in airtime in the state -- a sign of their commitment to the race.

Rossi is widely expected to be the Republican nominee but former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin (R) has endorsed another GOPer -- former Washington Redskins tight end Clint Didier (R) -- in the the Aug. 17 primary. (All candidates will run on a single ballot with the top two votegetters advancing to the general election.)

Rossi brushed off the impact of Palin's endorsement of Didier. "We want to welcome anybody that wants to work in good faith to turn this country around, and we haven't been seeking endorsements," Rossi said, adding that Palin endorsed Didier "three weeks before I even got in the race."

By Felicia Sonmez  |  July 27, 2010; 4:38 PM ET
Categories:  Senate  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Establishment wins as primary and third-party challenges fizzle
Next: Fallin, Askins to face off in battle to become Oklahoma's first woman governor

Comments


Freddie and Fannie are in FINREG.

Posted by: TheBabeNemo | July 28, 2010 2:43 PM | Report abuse

How about putting Frank and Dodd in jail too?

Posted by: leapin | July 28, 2010 1:49 PM | Report abuse

"Fun stuff in Florida:

"As the unexpectedly contested Florida Republican gubernatorial primary enters its final month, a winner has started to emerge after the millions in negative TV ads plastered across the state by state Attorney General Bill McCollum and wealthy businessman Rick Scott -- and that lucky candidate is Democratic candidate Alex Sink.

* * * *

Posted by: drindl | July 27, 2010 11:21 PM"

Funny I'd missed Fix's article on this political NEWS development regarding candidate Sink. Guess that's because, well, he didn't write one. The good news: thanks to Fix, we now know everything there is to know about Mitt Ronmey's staff directory.

________

To Fix Interns: It is past 9:00am. Did you read WashPo, NYT, HuffPo, and DailyKos this morning to check out what the real world is talking about today? Now put down the Washington Times, turn off Fox News, and get to reading please.

Posted by: broadwayjoe | July 28, 2010 9:15 AM | Report abuse

Rossi is dead in the water.

Add this state to the growing list of formerly "in play" states where the Senate seat will stay with the Democrats.

Posted by: margaretmeyers | July 28, 2010 7:11 AM | Report abuse

No, the government shut down wasn't over a balanced budget. Both Clinton and Gingrich proposed balanced budgets. Clinton wanted to fund it by raising taxes. Gingrich's plan was to force Clinton into making unpopular spending cuts. Cuts which Republicans never bothered to make when Bush took office. Of course, the idea would be that Clinton would take a political hit by making cuts in things like Medicare. Again, Republicans made NONE of the spending cuts under Bush despite their insistence that they were necessary under Clinton. Hmmm...deficits only important under a Democrat? I think I'm having deja vu.

The government was shut down because Gingrich wanted Clinton to take a political hit for slashing popular programs.

And for the revisionists out there, the Republicans never got the budget they wanted. They eventually conceded to something resembling Clinton's original budget. It was the Republicans that conceded to Clinton mainly because the Republicans were taking the political damage, not Clinton. And the Clinton budget was passed. And guess what? It was a balanced budget.

The government shut down wasn't about balancing the budget. It was about damaging Clinton.

Posted by: DDAWD | July 28, 2010 4:47 AM | Report abuse

Wow DDAWD I guess he really nailed you, huh? A meth burnout says ... he says you're WRONG! How will you ever recover from this devastating calamity?

Posted by: Noacoler | July 28, 2010 2:56 AM | Report abuse

Ddawd writes:

Democrats have been far more fiscally responsible than Republicans. There's absolutely no debate about this. None.

Posted by: DDAWD | July 28, 2010 12:45 AM

_____________________________________


There is no debate about this because you are completely out of your mind.

The Republicans in Congress had to shut down the government to get Clinton to close the deficit - leading to a balanced budget.

Look at any State in the Union - the democrats are spending freely - and the Republicans are holding back spending.


Your reasoning is so tortured and counter to reality itself.

Yea, there is no debate - because the entire country knows you are wrong.

.

Posted by: YouCanPostThis | July 28, 2010 2:24 AM | Report abuse

Yeah DDAWD I don't get it with him, either he's really stupid or he thinks we are.  Like parlaying the Democratic takeover of Congress in response to Bush's miserable presidency as proof that the economic calamity was the Democrats' doing.  And of course it's going to be "who controls the purse strings" from now on.  But Brigade isn't a contributor, he's a conduit, a pipeline straight from the conservative orthodoxy of the day and pretty much every political paragraph just a lead-in to some sexual slur.  And he thinks all that is clever.

The part I wonder about the Republicans .. do they really believe all that junk?  I don't think they do.  I think they torque each other up with all that fiscal responsibility garbage but inside they know it's a jive, they have no intention of reducing the deficit, it's just satisfying and cathartic tough talk.  When have they ever wanted to accumulate a surplus or pay down the debt?  As soon as things are looking good they want to cut taxes.  And when things are looking bad too.

My own view is that they want the economy to collapse, making working people desperate, and willing to work for less, to pit us against each other so we're not pitted against them (if the American people were paying attention instead of screaming about Obama's birth certificate they'd be pulling executives and Republicans from their limos and bludgeoning them to death).  People scared of losing their jobs won't form unions, won't salary-negotiate, they'll take what they can get to keep their kids from starving.  Republican paradise.  In that light everything they do suddenly makes logical sense.  Blocking unemployment compensation, blocking healthcare reform, aiming the stimulus where it will do the least good.

Posted by: Noacoler | July 28, 2010 1:15 AM | Report abuse

Yeah, Noa, I don't get Brigade's whole thing with lying. Supposedly, it's the philosophy of Republicans to be fiscally conservative. Is his point that the instant that Bush took office, they decided their philosophy didn't matter? Of course not. Republicans aren't fiscally conservative. Democrats are far more so. Even I remember how Republicans howled against the balanced budget at the end of the Clinton years. It was the talking point of Republicans that we should not be paying off the debt. That's what they said during Clinton and that's how they behaved during Bush in running up those huge deficits. We've all seen that CBO chart by now. The deficits have virtually nothing to do with the stimulus or TARP. The Bush tax cuts (which by Republicans' definition, was forced down our throats) are far more deficit producing than any Obama policy.

Give us MORE Democrats. They would have tamped down deficits even more. They would have passed a public option which the CBO scored as deficit reducing. They would have put fewer tax cuts in the stimulus package which tamps down the deficit since on a per dollar basis, a dollar of spending generates more tax revenue than a dollar of tax cuts. Furthermore, Democrats would have passed a better stimulus meaning we get out of the recession sooner leading to more tax revenue. We would have passed a better FinReg bill, meaning a smaller chance we have to bail out banks. This FinReg we got is ok, but it's so reliant on regulators. If it were in place during the Bush administration, it would not have changed a single thing as Bush would have gutted the regulatory power.

That's just the top of the iceberg. Anyone who isn't informed by Sean Hannity or late night comics knows that Democrats have been far more fiscally responsible than Republicans. There's absolutely no debate about this. None.

Posted by: DDAWD | July 28, 2010 12:45 AM | Report abuse

The simple fact is no one likes the way Obama and the democrats have done things.


In America, the people are supposed to control the government.

Obama thinks that the leftists should be able to win one election - and jam through all these permanent changes AGAINST THE WILL OF THE AMERICAN PEOPLE.

It is that simple.

I'm not sure how much more foolish Obama could be.

For all the complaints about the birthers - the truth is OBAMA HAS BEEN GOVERNING IN AN UNAMERICAN WAY.

It is that simple - look at the bloggers here on this board - they want to silence their opposition.

Never in American history has there been such a group of people who do NOT believe in Freedom of Speech. It is UNAMERICAN.

The fish rots from the head, and in this case Obama stinks.

It is actually amazing - the demonstration of arrogance and stupidity from Obama.

The American People do not want this.

Obama has FORGOTTEN this is the PEOPLES' GOVERNMENT - not his.


.

Posted by: YouCanPostThis | July 28, 2010 12:09 AM | Report abuse

Fun stuff in Florida:

"As the unexpectedly contested Florida Republican gubernatorial primary enters its final month, a winner has started to emerge after the millions in negative TV ads plastered across the state by state Attorney General Bill McCollum and wealthy businessman Rick Scott -- and that lucky candidate is Democratic candidate Alex Sink.

Last week, a fresh poll of the governor's race showed that despite being the third wheel in the second-most entertaining Florida political soap opera of the year, Sink has managed to pull ahead of both Republican candidates in general election matchups, thanks to tanking favorability numbers for both Scott and McCollum.

According to local press reports out of Florida, Republicans are starting to get nervous about Scott, the frontrunner for the party's nomination. Scott looks like the guy who'll win Aug. 24, leaving Florida Republicans with perhaps the most damaged Republican candidate for governor since Jim Giibbons. Even if Scott somehow loses to McCollum, his spending (plus McCollum's own problems of course) have Democrats overjoyed with the situation. In fact, things have played out in Sink's favor beyond the Democrats' wildest hopes ever since Scott jumped into the race back in April. "

Posted by: drindl | July 27, 2010 11:21 PM | Report abuse

Congrats Fallin (and Palin) in Oklahoma.

Posted by: JakeD2 | July 27, 2010 10:54 PM | Report abuse

shrink2:

My favorite movie is "Forrest Gump". What's yours?

Posted by: JakeD2 | July 27, 2010 10:31 PM | Report abuse

It gets worse.

It was a joke, I was trying to cast asparagus on the usual suspect. But now that I read back against it, it looks like nasty.

The humor problem. If you want to send up an ignorant subject, you have to send code in the language to let people know they were not on he surface of the joke. But it is not a joke of no one can be in on it, or who stood where.

Then people take umbrage and you wish you never tried.

Off the cuff, I think Chapelle is going to die by comedy unless he figures out these things.

Posted by: shrink2 | July 27, 2010 10:30 PM | Report abuse

shrink2 writes
"Have any of you every questioned the validity of IQ testing? You know, the idea that there are "smart" people who are not really smart."


There was that kid I knew in grade school & high school who was extremely smart, straight A's in a top school, etc. But when he went to college he'd forget to eat.


.

Posted by: bsimon1 | July 27, 2010 10:14 PM | Report abuse

ceflynlyn writes
"Wouldn't a true Fiscal Conservative believe in paying off the national Debt before tax cuts so that we didn't have to pay out so much in interest on the national Debt?

Can you name me one Republican who has made that argument in my lifetime? (Born 1947)"


May I see your papers?


.

Posted by: bsimon1 | July 27, 2010 10:04 PM | Report abuse

Jake, I think you are misunderestimated.
That was funny.

Posted by: shrink2 | July 27, 2010 10:04 PM | Report abuse

Reagan endorsed Goldwater (who lost). It happens.

Posted by: JakeD2 | July 27, 2010 9:59 PM | Report abuse

It was a lame joke, it was not for you*.

*Pearl Jam all rights preserves

Posted by: shrink2 | July 27, 2010 9:46 PM | Report abuse

Well no doubt we can count on help from the teabaggers, stalking menacingly around the Capitol with open-carried heat to look out for those poor presecuted wealthy.

Saw closed-captions Gingrich wagging his jowels on a TV at the gym, and if the captions were telling it straight, he believes that raising taxes on the wealthy will plunge us into a Depression.

Amazing how rigidly these guys believe that junk.

Posted by: Noacoler | July 27, 2010 9:38 PM | Report abuse

Have any of you every questioned the validity of IQ testing? You know, the idea that there are "smart" people who are not really smart, not even a little and "stupid" people, unrecognized, not stupid at all, they through sheer strength of character, visceral persistence priapistic illiteracy, no tact no ability to listen or even care about anything, anyone else anyone says, or anyone else, or anyone else no matter what?

Posted by: shrink2 | July 27, 2010 9:01 PM
----

I'm not exactly sure I'm following you. I've known people who have been VERY successful who were what we call "street smart" but not necessarily "book smart." They are usually strong-willed, charismatic people, the type you see pushing products on infomercials, a little of the huckster in them. They couldn't get an engineering degree, but they can start companies and hire engineers. I think it was Ross Perot who said, the secret to business success is to hire people who are smarter than you and pay them what they're worth. Potential has to be coupled with ambition to lead anywhere---unless your born with the proverbial silver spoon. A high IQ is potential, but some people with high IQs don't amount to a pinch of crap. Wasted potential.

Posted by: Brigade | July 27, 2010 9:35 PM | Report abuse

If Palin's shout out won't help, maybe a Pawlenty endorsement will help ... , well, after people are told who the [blank] he is. LOL.

Posted by: broadwayjoe | July 27, 2010 9:06 PM | Report abuse

From 44:
"Bill Thomas, the former GOP Ways and Means chairman who led negotiations over the legislation, said House Republicans indeed wanted to make the tax cuts permanent, but that the sunset provision had to be added to get them through the Senate.

"We didn't write them to expire in 10 years because we were worried about huge deficits. We wrote them that way because it was the only way to make law," Thomas said. "

Talk about dragging somebody down.

Being perspicacious guys and knowing of their permanent majority, the Republicans wrote their welfare for the rich act with a sunset provision to keep the democrats from filibustering it. When you have a permanent majority you can wait till the tax cuts produce absolute prosperity just around the corner and a chicken in every pot on Sunday. hen you use uoyr permanent majority.

Of course cruel fate intervened, and now the Republicans face a couple minor hurdles.

To get the tax cuts restored permanently they need a majority in the House. John Boehner astute majority Leader has carefully counted noses and knows that his permanent majority will vote for him.

They need sixty votes to break a likely filibuster in the Senator. Mitch McConnell, crafty leader of the Republican Permanent Majority has figured out just how to come up with those twenty needed votes some how. Then the Republicans need their permanent majority to vote for passage of the bill. "Piece of cake" said the crafty Majority Leader of the Permanent republican majority.

and then all it rqueires is for george Bush himself to sign the bill, and of course he will because he signed the first one, didn't he?

When Pelosi and Reid allow the republicans LOTS of mike and camera time to flog this dead elephant, and let the cooling breezes of august distribute its wonderful bouquet throughout this great land, just who will be dragging whom down?

And Rossi wants an office next to that putrid elephant?

Posted by: ceflynline | July 27, 2010 9:04 PM | Report abuse

Have any of you every questioned the validity of IQ testing? You know, the idea that there are "smart" people who are not really smart, not even a little and "stupid" people, unrecognized, not stupid at all, they through sheer strength of character, visceral persistence priapistic illiteracy, no tact no ability to listen or even care about anything, anyone else anyone says, or anyone else, or anyone else no matter what?

Posted by: shrink2 | July 27, 2010 9:01 PM | Report abuse

Patty Murray is going to get dragged down by Obama.


We can start calling Obama a drag queen.

.

Posted by: YouCanPostThis | July 27, 2010 8:47 PM | Report abuse

I'll get Sarah's approving nod, and you get whatever you can from Nasty Nancy---the old bag. Posted by: Brigade

Brigade, it is good to be funny, but eeeewww. Sometimes bad visual is funny, but, but,

Jake, life is too short.

When we post here, we may be wasting literally minutes of our lives and time waits for no one.


Posted by: shrink2 | July 27, 2010 8:45 PM | Report abuse

Noacoler wrote,
"Well Brigade Republicans also controlled the purse strings for most of Bush's two terms, so why did he run up such massive deficits?"
----

Read my post. One party government. I'm suggesting we try the formula of the Clinton years: give Obama a Republican Congress for his final two years in office. He won't be so frisky, he'll have to compromise, and the country will be much better off. Did it soak in this time? Do you need further clarification?
----

"So much for inconvenient truths."

Exactly.
----

"No, you can prevaricate and dodge but it's under Republican presidents that we run up deficits, because Republcans have this weird fascination with uncompensated tax cuts as economic stimulus, which just isn't true. Magic of the marketplace and all that junk."
----

Only one of us need prevaricate and dodge, and it isn't me. Increased tax revenues followed tax cuts for both Reagan AND Bush43. The problem comes when you SPEND way more than you take in. Then, when the country goes into recession, tax revenues fall and people like you can make phony arguments. Moonbat was correct that economics is not your strong suit. Now that it comes up, just what IS your strong suit?

Here's a likely scenario for what happens to the Bush tax cuts: Obama will want to extend all of them but those for people earning above $250,000---in the interest of helping economic recovery; Republicans will hunker down and say, "All or nothing!" Failing a compromise, Obama will get the best of both (liberal) worlds; ALL the tax cuts will sunset and Republicans will be blamed---because of their obstinacy.
-----

"Why don't you just stick to the lurid sexual insults . . . "

Not sure what you mean by that. However, I wouldn't wait for HCR to kick in before getting some penicillin if I were you; that stuff can be awfully stubborn if you don't take care of it right away.
----

"and leave the facts to people who can deal with them."

Facts. Ah yes, those pesky things that you and DDAWD avoid like the plague.

You're right about one thing. Life is too short---especially short for foreigners unfortunate enough to be caught with personal property in a third-world communist country.


Posted by: Brigade | July 27, 2010 8:40 PM | Report abuse

It's official: Tundra Tramp Sarah Palin is electoral poison.


http://voices.washingtonpost.com/plum-line/2010/07/more_evidence_sarah_palin_shou.html?hpid=opinionsbox1

"The key here is that this isn't a one-off finding: Palin's toxicity is born out in other polls, too. A recent Gallup poll noted a striking disconnect in public attitudes towards Palin: While her favorability rating is far higher among Republicans than any other 2012 GOP contenders, she's also far and away the least liked of all the 2012 hopefuls among Americans overall.

That's not all: A recent NBC/WSJ poll found that a majority of adults nationwide would look negatively on candidates endorsed by Palin.

The pattern is becoming overwhelmingly obvious. Palin's current role of celebrity quasi-candidate works for her. It's allowed her to insulate herself from direct media cross-examination and to communicate directly to the Palin Nation hordes, who remain as transfixed as ever. But the rest of the world continues to find her more and more distasteful, and it's growing less likely that she'll succeed if she ever steps outside the bubble she's crafted for herself."

The comments are of course perfectly predictable. "You libs are afraid of her."

Please. GOP, run this tramp as your nominee, blow your brains out.

Posted by: Noacoler | July 27, 2010 8:35 PM | Report abuse

Before 2008, you didnt hear that the democrats wanted to get out of Afghanistan


Now they do


It is almost has if the Obama people are purposely losing the war - so they have a justification to get out.

.

Posted by: YouCanPostThis | July 27, 2010 8:26 PM | Report abuse

So much for "Life is too short."

Posted by: JakeD2 | July 27, 2010 8:18 PM | Report abuse

Well Brigade Republicans also controlled the purse strings for most of Bush's two terms, so why did he run up such massive deficits?

So much for inconvenient truths.

No, you can prevaricate and dodge but it's under Republican presidents that we run up deficits, because Republcans have this weird fascination with uncompensated tax cuts as economic stimulus, which just isn't true. Magic of the marketplace and all that junk.

Why don't you just stick to the lurid sexual insults and leave the facts to people who can deal with them.

Posted by: Noacoler | July 27, 2010 8:11 PM | Report abuse

ddawd

Your membership card in the human race has been revoked.


No person having humanity could have said the things you have.

Your racism and lies know no bounds.

.

Posted by: YouCanPostThis | July 27, 2010 8:05 PM | Report abuse

Why waste your time on a liar, DDAWD? Establish and ignore. Life is too short.

Posted by: Noacoler | July 27, 2010 7:54 PM
---

As usual when you have no facts, result to snark and name-calling. Good thing neither of you attempted to document any actual "lies."

So's your mother!

Posted by: Brigade | July 27, 2010 8:04 PM | Report abuse

The dog in the Flintstones .....

The dog in the Flintstones. ....

The dog in the Flintstones.........


.

Posted by: YouCanPostThis | July 27, 2010 8:01 PM | Report abuse

What;s the draw of being in this Conservative club anyways that it's worth being so dishonest? Is Sarah Palin's approving nod so important?

Posted by: DDAWD | July 27, 2010 7:48 PM
----

Sorry, DDAWD, Republicans controlled the purse strings when the budget was balanced in the Clinton years. An inconvenient truth. Let's try that formula again this November. You share one trait with Al Gore: the inability to distinguish truth from dishonesty. I guess that's why you never watched the 1999 CNN interview with Wolf Blitzer in which Gore claimed his was the initiative behind the invention of the internet. Another inconvenient truth.

And what DID happen to Lou Dobbs? Is he by chance related to Fred C. Dobbs?

The only thing you really need to become a member of the Conservative club is the very thing you lack (the ability to distinguish). Sorry. I'll get Sarah's approving nod, and you get whatever you can from Nasty Nancy---the old bag.

Posted by: Brigade | July 27, 2010 8:01 PM | Report abuse

Why waste your time on a liar, DDAWD? Establish and ignore. Life is too short.

Posted by: Noacoler | July 27, 2010 7:54 PM | Report abuse

Brigade, do you people get like membership cards or at least learn a secret handshake or something?

What;s the draw of being in this Conservative club anyways that it's worth being so dishonest? Is Sarah Palin's approving nod so important?

Posted by: DDAWD | July 27, 2010 7:48 PM | Report abuse

Clinton(D) surplus
Bush II(R) deficits

Lousy lying Republican, pardon my triple redundancy

Posted by: Noacoler | July 27, 2010 7:06 PM

----

Clinton & Republican Congress (surplus)
(who controls the purse?)

Bush II(R) & Democratic Congress---after 2006 (economic collapse)

Thieving, scum-sucking Democrats, pardon my triple redundancy.

Let's try the Clinton formula again starting this November.

If things don't work out in Vietnam, there's always North Korea.

Posted by: Brigade | July 27, 2010 7:37 PM | Report abuse

Here's to hoping that Gov. Palin wins all of MASSACHUSETTS electoral votes in 2012:

http://www.boston.com/news/local/breaking_news/2010/07/mass_legislatur.html

Posted by: JakeD2 | July 27, 2010 7:36 PM | Report abuse

Soo what's the TP stance on financial reform?

Has community organizer Dick Armey given them any marching orders yet?

What is the TP reaction to "Dino Rossi backs repeal of Wall Street reform."

Posted by: knjincvc | July 27, 2010 7:35 PM | Report abuse

What was scarier was the promise of an upcoming Fix article on ... Haley Barbour's staff directory. :)

Is FixWorld a parallel universe existing between BroderWorld and BaggerWorld but completely outside the orbit of the Real World?

Posted by: broadwayjoe | July 27, 2010 7:33 PM | Report abuse

@broadwayjoe: "heritage" --> provenance.

And while we're on the subject what say we retire the gush over Tim Pawlenty, John Thune, and the rest of Chris' schoolgirl crush candidates. Nobody cares about these guys.

I wouldn't expect Cillizza to read the NYT, much less HuffPo or KOS, his head would explode.

But yeah, Romney's staff directory, that was just idiotic. Absolute waste of every millisecond of human life spent writing, distributing, and reading it. Just like Pawlenty's endorsements.

Posted by: Noacoler | July 27, 2010 7:27 PM | Report abuse

Before any more articles about Mitt Romney's staff directory, "Dan Coats, the anti-Obama," and cherry picked anti-BHO polls of unknown heritage or methodology, do us favor.

Take a moment in the morning to read, gulp, the Washington Post, the NYT, Daily Kos, and HuffPo, and check out what political stories people are talking about and are interested in.

May be wrong but I kinda doubt anyone outside Rossi's immediate family is interested in "Dino Rossi backs repeal of Wall Street reform."

And by all means, suppress the urge, no matter how strong, to type "Will President Obama Drag Down Senate Candidates?" It may get you a Drudge link (which it did) but it ain't news or analysis. Just sayin'.

Posted by: broadwayjoe | July 27, 2010 7:12 PM | Report abuse

Really, reason5, are you actually counting on readers having no memory of the last few presidencies? Democrats as the deficit-runners? Does this kind of blatant dishonesty come naturally to you or did you have to cultivate it?

Reagan (R) deficits
Bush I (R) deficits
Clinton(D) surplus
Bush II(R) deficits

Lousy lying Republican, pardon my triple redundancy

Posted by: Noacoler | July 27, 2010 7:06 PM | Report abuse

Turns out folks have caught up to Palin's nonsense. The following is what they call ... "news."
____________

From HuffPo:

"Sarah Palin's endorsement of Republican candidate Kelly Ayotte in the race for U.S. Senate in New Hampshire may have adversely affected the conservative contender's campaign.

A new survey from Public Policy Polling finds that Ayotte has experienced diminished support from moderate voters since the ex-Alaska Governor issued a statement of support for her candidacy."

Posted by: broadwayjoe | July 27, 2010 6:58 PM | Report abuse

Cut and paste from non-competitive wannabe GOP candidate's press release (Dino Rossi). Check.

Pretty weak tea.

Posted by: broadwayjoe | July 27, 2010 6:45 PM | Report abuse

From the annuls of " I never thought I'd see that in print"

don't you miss the fiscal conservancy of the Bush years.

==

"annals"

"conservatism"

illiterate much?

And Bush as a fiscal conservative wouldn't even fly as deadpan

Posted by: Noacoler | July 27, 2010 6:36 PM | Report abuse

Did Dino Rossi "DEMAND" Glass-Steagall be put back on the books?

Posted by: knjincvc | July 27, 2010 6:29 PM | Report abuse

I have but one niggling question about "True Fiscal Conservatives".

Wouldn't a true Fiscal Conservative believe in paying off the national Debt before tax cuts so that we didn't have to pay out so much in interest on the national Debt?

Can you name me one Republican who has made that argument in my lifetime? (Born 1947)

Posted by: ceflynline | July 27, 2010 6:23 PM | Report abuse

And the Party of "No question is ever resolved until the Republican Point Prevails" adds another chant to its litany: Impeach Earl Warren. US out of UN, DEWEY!!!, Abolish SS, 54-40 or Fight!'

That last is, of course, Manifest destiny War Hawk Whig, but they were the people who, when the Whig Party disintegrated over Abolition joined to found the new Manifest destiny Republican party.

I wonder if somewhere in some well reserved John Birch meeting Hall there are crinkly old firsters thinking, "If we go ahead and Impeach earl warren it will automatically abolish Miranda, Escobedo, and Gideon."

Posted by: ceflynline | July 27, 2010 6:14 PM | Report abuse

Incidentally, that CREW list of most corrupt politicians that Jeff Greene cited in his ad in the previous post also includes Rossi.

Posted by: DDAWD | July 27, 2010 6:13 PM | Report abuse

John1263:

There's ALWAYS a chance. Don't you remember, John112263?

Posted by: JakeD2 | July 27, 2010 6:12 PM | Report abuse

If you can manage to say that deadpan, shrink, you could do standup

Posted by: Noacoler | July 27, 2010 6:06 PM | Report abuse

From the annuls of " I never thought I'd see that in print"

don't you miss the fiscal conservancy of the Bush years.

Posted by: Moonbat | July 27, 2010 6:06 PM | Report abuse

Don't play dumb. You know very well that when rich people pay less money in taxes, the deficit is reduced because they use the money they didn't pay in taxes to create jobs. Then the people who work those jobs get taxed and pay even more money than the amount of money that would have gone to the government if the rich person were taxed. You don't reduce the deficit by taxing people with lots of money, you reduce it by taxing the people who work for them. Remember, in the free enterprise system, we socialize the pain so we can privatize the profit. It sounds unfair, but it works.

Posted by: shrink2 | July 27, 2010 6:02 PM | Report abuse

Fiscal conservative Republicans, huh? Got any?

Good luck selling that one while the gobs are trying to make the Bush tax cuts permanent.

Posted by: Noacoler | July 27, 2010 5:44 PM | Report abuse

OMG. Drivl and Ped and ddunce Hogging up a thread and not allowing any thought through.

I am shocked, shocked.............

Posted by: Moonbat | July 27, 2010 5:43 PM | Report abuse

"I live in Washington state and I met with Dino Rossi last week. I asked him if he wanted ketchup with his fries and he said, yes, yes as a matter of fact I would."

Posted by: shrink2 | July 27, 2010 5:39 PM | Report abuse

drindl, there you go again.

I live in Washington state and I met with Dino Rossi last week.

Dino Rossi balanced the Washington State budget back in 2002, as Senate Ways & Means Chairman, when we had a $2.8 billion deficit w/o a tax increase after the dotcom bubble burst & 9-11.

As to Obamaa's support where is your supporting data ? The last 2 recent polls - Gallup 40% support for Obama & WSJ/NBC 39% for Obama.

If Independents support Obama & the Democrats how come they have backed fiscal conservative Republicans in NJ, VA & MASS!

Coming soon to a TV near you in 11/2010 watch Senate seats in WA, CA, NEV, CO, ND, AR, PA, FLA & ILL all go to the GOP!

Posted by: King2641 | July 27, 2010 5:26 PM | Report abuse

drindl, there you go again.

I live in Washington state and I met with Dino Rossi last week.

Dino Rossi balanced the Washington State budget back in 2002, as Senate Ways & Means Chairman, when we had a $2.8 billion deficit w/o a tax increase after the dotcom bubble burst & 9-11.

As to Obamaa's support where is your supporting data ? The last 2 recent polls - Gallup 40% support for Obama & WSJ/NBC 39% for Obama.

If Independents support Obama & the Democrats how come they have backed fiscal conservative Republicans in NJ, VA & MASS!

Coming soon to a TV near you in 11/2010 watch Senate seats in WA, CA, NEV, CO, ND, AR, PA, FLA & ILL all go to the GOP!

Posted by: King2641 | July 27, 2010 5:25 PM | Report abuse

First of all, if he is so amazingly ignorant of the history of the past 3 years -- the precipitous craash brought on by republicons and the subsequent turn around and now regulation of the things that caused the crash, he deserves no place in any position of power.

Second of all, if he is so amazingly ignorant of how laws are made in the United States and therefore does not know that there is no chance of a repeal AT LEAST until President Obama finishes his second term then he also deserves no position in the US government.

republicons reunning on repeals are either amazingly stupid., or they are insulting you the voter by assuming you are. They are unliekly to gain a majority in either house, and even if they do manage to steal away with one or the other they will not mathematically be capable of gaining enough seat for any veto overrides. Same old republicon conservative party. play the voters for carnival rubes. Assume that the voters are dumber than dirt.

Posted by: John1263 | July 27, 2010 5:18 PM | Report abuse

Felicia, you know even less about politics in WA than zouk knows about owning land abroad. Let someone from here handle this.

Rossi? A joke. Two-time loser, repellent and unpleasant man whose support comes only from terminally defiant types. Recently lauded for teaching courses on how to rake in the cash taking advantage of foreclosures. A nasty piece of work preceded by a really bad reputation.

Clint Didier? An unknown guy whose cardboards are heavy on the sports connection. "Clint Didier has a game plan for Washington," cartoon of a football helmet. His supporters put up signs in the dead of night and steal away in SUVs.

Hint, Fix munchkins: a Palin endorsement isn't going to exactly resonate in this state. And how's it doing for Ayotte?

Posted by: Noacoler | July 27, 2010 5:18 PM | Report abuse

No wonder he's lost so many races. what a clubfooted candidate. Americans support financial reform by huge margins.

"As congressional Republicans double down on President Bush’s failed economic policies, a new National Journal/Pew Research poll finds that Americans believe President Obama’s “policies offer a better chance at improving the economy over the policies of his predecessor.”

Interestingly, more Democrats favor Obama’s policies than Republicans favor Bush’s, while independents overwhelming side with Obama. Overall, despite continued tough economic times, 46 percent of Americans say Obama’s policies will do more to improve the economy, compared to just 29 percent who say the same of Bush’s"

americans, fortunately are not as stupid as republicans think they are.

Posted by: drindl | July 27, 2010 5:08 PM | Report abuse

[Rossi added] that Palin endorsed Didier "three weeks before I even got in the race."

I think he should ask Sarah that question instead of speaking for her. Dino might ask, "Sarah, if you had known I was going to run, you would have endorsed me not Clint the farm welfare queen, right? Isn't that right Sarah??"

Posted by: shrink2 | July 27, 2010 5:00 PM | Report abuse

"Former state Sen. Dino Rossi (R) said today that he would support repealing the financial regulatory reform law, becoming the first candidate this cycle to advocate for doing away with the measure."

That's because he's a lying sack of sh*t getting tons of Wall Street money. Everything he says about the bill is a blatant lie.

He just wants them to be free to cause another meltdown, which their greed will make inevitable.

Posted by: drindl | July 27, 2010 4:55 PM | Report abuse

See ya Dino, gee, we hardly knew ye...just kidding, we knew ye too well.

Posted by: shrink2 | July 27, 2010 4:53 PM | Report abuse

Well, that's half a million for the RNSC down the drain...

Posted by: DDAWD | July 27, 2010 4:49 PM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company