Georgetown Georgianna has some 'splaining to do

[PonderInc]

quote:Originally posted by Gaspar

I have to look at what we lose if we elect Oliver over Sullivan.

Oklahoma loses it's seat on one of the most powerful committees in the House, the Energy & Commerce Committee.

We lose positions on the Health & Environment Subcommittee,
Hazzardous Materials Subcommittee,  and the Environment & Air Quality Subcommittees, ending up with a junior Rep that will have to spend the next 4 to 8 years working her way back into some of those positions.

We also lose one of the biggest proponents of the FairTax system in the Senate.  That is unacceptable to anyone with a Libertarian mindset.  

Hmmm...which would I rather have: someone who sits on powerful committees with whom I totally disagree, and think that he votes against my best interests?  Or someone who does not sit on such important committees (yet) but who might better represent my interests?

Every time I have taken the time to write Sullivan to ask him to support environmental or basic conservative concepts like, well, energy conservation or conservation of natural resources, I just get a little form letter back reiterating his ironclad stance...basically I might as well be writing Dick Cheney for all the difference it has made.  Never makes me feel like Sullivan has acted as my "representative."

Here's a fun way to look at Sullivan's record.  Go to Project Vote Smart.  There, you can see how Sullivan's record stands up to "Interest Group Ratings."  As long as you understand what the organizations and interest groups stand for, you can get a pretty good feel for how they feel about a candidate's record.  This is a quick and dirty "broad brush" look at a candidate, but it's interesting...good for people who don't have time to examine every issue and every vote.

[Steve]

Oliver, Sullivan, Inhofe, Rice, I am sick of this year's campaigns.  They all spend so much money on advertising what a a**hole their opponent is, and tell us little of their own views.

IMO, we need to have a national referrendum to set congressional salaries at the median salary of all U.S. workers.  Eliminate fat congressional pensions, and make them retire with social security and savings, like the other 99.9% of us have to.  Outlaw lobbbying and PACs, and cap campaign contributions to $500 from individual citizens only.  Perhaps make a law degree disqualify one for public office as I have always felt that is the fox guarding the hen house, and then abolish term limits.  Maybe then we would get some people in Washington that really cared about the future of this country, not their own twisted personal power and financial gain.

Of course, it ain't gonna happen, but one can wish.

[USRufnex]

Did someone mention Gene Stipe?  

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vq4KVYewUoQ

[]

[Conan71]

Here's Georgianna's latest spin, turns out some of her prior campaign "contributors" bought Apt Budget.

http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?articleID=20081023_16_A9_hQuest657105

Exactly why would some Texas business people donate to a congressional campaign in Oklahoma?  They also make mention of Ms. Oliver's 2007 salary from Evergreen Solutions being $423K.  I'm curious if she made that much in '05 or '06.

This is a shame, I thought the Dems finally put up a worthy opponent, I guess I was wrong.

"Paging Mr. Stipe! Paging Mr. Stipe! Ms. Oliver is on line 2!"  

EDIT: Whoops, sorry about that, but it is good news that GNR is finally releasing "Chinese Democracy".

[sgrizzle]

Thanks for updating the link.

I believe it was discussed previously she did make that in previous years.

Her company was developing a software package, until it's created it's not much of an asset (in the case of Vista it's not worth much afterwards either) so I can follow her campaign's logic.

[Conan71]

quote:Originally posted by sgrizzle

Thanks for updating the link.

I believe it was discussed previously she did make that in previous years.

Her company was developing a software package, until it's created it's not much of an asset (in the case of Vista it's not worth much afterwards either) so I can follow her campaign's logic.

Eh, how do you pick a number like $400K for the company?  It's still an ethical issue in that these people had been donors to her campaign prior to buying the company.  She left herself wide open to a severe probing on this.

It's the same glib arrogance just about every other politician exhibits.  I don't think she deserves a pass on this.  DNC needs to try harder in '10.