From Kevin Fischer's blog
The campaign of Mark Green, the Republican candidate for governor in 2006, did not violate federal law when it transferred $1.2 million from his congressional account to his state fund.Jim Doyle and the Democrats who screamed bloody murder during the entire gubernatorial campaign: DEAD WRONG
Mark Green: EXONERATED.
Remember, it was Doyle who had his henchmen on the State Elections Board rule against the transfer of funds so Green would have far less money to get his message out.This was a campaign issue for months. Now that Green was ruled right and his detractors, including the Governor, wrong, there was barely a peep about it.The Journal/Sentinel dedicated all of 4 short paragraphs to the story
Jay can admit he was wrong again at any time
Sunday, May 13, 2007
MOST UNDER-REPORTED STORY OF THE WEEK
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
12 comments:
game,
I hope you aren't holding your breath waiting for that apology from Jay. His being a party hack prevents him from doing the right thing.
What punishments are going to be met out to the Doyle henchmen? Are any of them going to be removed from office?
Should Doyle have to step down?
Actually, the "exoneration" was that the Federal Elections Commission said Green didn't seem to break any federal laws. While it's true that the Wisconsin Democracy Campaign filed with the FEC, what Doyle and we bloggers were concerned about was Green's violation of state law. The entity that ruled against Green was the State Elections Board.
Green came to an agreement with the SEB in March that he could never use the disputed funds, and the state Supreme Court threw out Green's lawsuit.
So this "exoneration" from the FEC makes no difference at all. That may be why the paper didn't bother to cover it!
>crickets<
Jay, same crickets playing while waiting for the various apologies you owe the game. Why should anyone feed your ego when you RUN when it is your turn to apologize?
Now, what else do you have to domp from your Democrat conference calls?
Basicly this is a moot point on the financing this year because the election the money was to go to has past.
Jay, we will see how you react when the shoe is on your foot and your side gets screwed by the WI Kangaroo courts.
Huh?
Let me put something to rest, pcd. In my life as a blogger--in my life, period--I have been on a grand total of two conference calls with elected Democrats. If you're counting, that's about half a call a year.
One was in the fall of 2005 with then-Governor Vilsack of Iowa, where I and and several other education bloggers talked about education and how to improve it. Nothing about Democratic electoral strategy; nothing I could "domp," whatever that means.
The other was a call a couple of months back with Wisconsin Lt. Gov. Barbara Lawton about SeniorCare. Only two bloggers called in, but many more were invited including, I believe, conservative bloggers. Lawton was extremely bi-partisan during the call, praising the work of people like Jim Sensenbrenner and Paul Ryan, and Republican legislative leaders. Again, nothing about Democratic election strategy; nothing to "domp."
(I'm not counting the "conference calls" that I did with sometimes 25,000 other Howard Dean supporters in 2003. I doubt you would, either.)
I'm somewhat flattered that you think I'm so plugged into the world of Democratic politics that I have access to politicans and strategy sessions all the time. But I don't.
So stick it, will you?
Jay,
You are the one that needs to stick it. Some people do read the blogs you write and post on to keep up with the manure you are spewing. You were the one bragging about how many people read your writings and how connected you were to the Democrat party.
Cite it, please. I know what I write. I don't brag. If you can't link to the post(s) where I do that, then don't say I do that.
Jay, Yeah, and liberals don't think they are liberal, but middle of the road.
Tell all of you what, click on Jay's name and follow it to the blogs he listed. Now, some of his comments may be cleaned up by now, and I didn't take screenshots. My bad, as liberals do censor and revise their remarks as they get called on them.
See, pcd, this is why you're a horrible person to try to have a conversation with.
When I write something, here or anywhere else on these intertubes, I back it up. I link to original sources, quote from them; I try to determine before I say something whether or not it's a fact.
For example, in the first comment on this thread, I was pretty sure I remembered that the state Supreme Court had dismissed Green's lawsuit asking for his money, but, rather than rely on "pretty sure," I did the research I needed to to be able to aver as fact that it happened.
You, on the other hand, just make stuff up. You accuse me offhandedly of lying, of deceit, of all kinds of things for which you have no evidence. When challenged to support your accusations, you result to additional name-calling and further accusations of dishonesty on the part of your opponents.
In short, you're all talk. You're proverbial hot air. You're a bully who can't take it when someone stands up to him and so just bullies harder.
Look, I don't know who you are, where you come from, or why you've turned out this way. But if any student of mine handed in the kind of comments you write and the kind of arguments you present, he would fail. Perhaps you should invite your supergenius cum laude daughter to review your writing and arguments before you post them, to save you the embarrassment.
Again:
>crickets<
Jay, same crickets when you are caught being wrong or worse.
pcd, I'm waiting to be proved wrong on anything.
You had your chance on this very thread.
Post a Comment