September 13, 2010
Tom Tangen Makes The Case Against Patty Murray
letter published in the
Everett Herald. Here's his first pragraph:
Patty Murray's television ads are great. But after listening to the people in the ads, I realized
that she has bought their votes with my tax money.
By way of the Instapundit.
Posted by Jim Miller at September 13, 2010
10:07 AM | Email This
1. Sorry, but Patty's idea of doing things involves going into debt for pork, pork, pork. Even forcing the Navy to buy stuff it didn't even want; just to please corporate campaign donors! Oh yah, and joining Obama in throwing gasoline on the fire in a country that's drowning in entitlement spending by adding even more entitlement spending (Obamacare). She claims to be "undecided" on the incredibly unpopular Cap & Trade (otherwise known as Cap & Scam, Cap & Tax and other descriptive nicknames), though she has been a reliable vote on the drastically unpopular Obama agenda. Rossi will NOT be a vote for such. Don't take your chances with Patty; go with the adult in the room---Dino Rossi.
Obama's "last ten years" comments really points out the issues with his rhetoric.
Democrats controlled the Senate for six of the last ten years (2001-2003, 2007-present).
They have controlled the House since 2007.
Patty Murray has been in the Senate for the "last ten years" therefore, she must be part of the problem of which Obama continuously speaks.
3. #2: People are really growing weary with a president who can't take responsibility for anything he's done. And he doesn't even see it. He is the perfect illustration of the way I've summed up Democrats: They want the power but none of the responsibility! Another reason we need to get rid of Patty Murray.
4. Patty's idea of doing things involves going into debt for pork, pork, pork.
And since you said it three times, it must be true! (You're a big fan of Sarah Palin, amirite?)
Obama's "last ten years" comments really points out the issues with his rhetoric.
Yeah, you guys have real issues with us liberals recalling what a miserable failure his immediate predecessor was. Well, we didn't vote for W., and so we don't share your moral culpability for all the pointless death and destruction he caused. Cry us a river.
Unfortunately, Murray's ads seem to be working to a degree. The latest Survey USA gives her a lead of 9 % points (50-41) in a small survey (500 respondents). It seems like the collective voters in the Puget Sound region need to be hit over the head with more facts about how she has been a financial burden on this state.
The case against Patty Murray needs to be exposed more- Dino Rossi will have swim upstream and make some noise. if he wants to be elected. It would not hurt for him to meet with Clint Didier and swallow some pride, to show us he really wants to win. Show some cajones....
My bad.. it was the Elway. I am going to vote for Rossi, but I am a realist here and know it will take momentum at the end for him to be able to win.
In response to #4 - Bush was bad, but Obama is clearly worse beyond your expectations. Same old tired liberal progressive tactic - boring and baseless.
7. In response to #4 - Bush was bad, but Obama is clearly worse beyond your expectations.
Please do tell me what, exactly, my expectations were. If they were "not as big of a humiliating failure as was W.," then I assure you President B. Hussein Obama has completely satisfied them.
Same old tired liberal progressive tactic - boring and baseless.
It really, really hurts to be reminded we liberals were right all along about your precious W., doesn't it?
@7 - That should have read beyond my expectations. You are in denial, so that was inaccurate.
Give up the precious W crap - that means nothing. I said that "Bush was bad" You have selective memory failure.
9. Give up the precious W crap - that means nothing. I said that "Bush was bad" You have selective memory failure.
Were you saying that in early 2001?
"My fellow Americans," Bush said, "at long last, we have reached the end of the dark period in American history that will come to be known as the Clinton Era, eight long years characterized by unprecedented economic expansion, a sharp decrease in crime, and sustained peace overseas. The time has come to put all of that behind us."
10. Were you saying that in early 2001?~ tensor
Um, hey tensor, please tell me you're not braindead enough to have taken something printed in 'the onion' as fact? Just Wow!
As for Piglet Patty, I hope we've seen the last of her come November's elections. 18 years in D.C. wasting my hard earned tax dollars is not what I consider a successful political career nor how I see my government working for me.
"we didn't vote for W., and so we don't share your moral culpability for all the pointless death and destruction he caused..."
Assume you mean the Iraq war. A little reminder.
"[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs." -- From a letter signed by Joe Lieberman, Dianne Feinstein, Barbara A. Milulski, Tom Daschle, & John Kerry among others on October 9, 1998
"Saddam's goal ... is to achieve the lifting of U.N. sanctions while retaining and enhancing Iraq's weapons of mass destruction programs. We cannot, we must not and we will not let him succeed." -- Madeline Albright, 1998
"(Saddam) will rebuild his arsenal of weapons of mass destruction and some day, some way, I am certain he will use that arsenal again, as he has 10 times since 1983" -- National Security Adviser Sandy Berger, Feb 18, 1998
"Iraq made commitments after the Gulf War to completely dismantle all weapons of mass destruction, and unfortunately, Iraq has not lived up to its agreement." -- Barbara Boxer, November 8, 2002
"The community of nations may see more and more of the very kind of threat Iraq poses now: a rogue state with weapons of mass destruction, ready to use them or provide them to terrorists. If we fail to respond today, Saddam and all those who would follow in his footsteps will be emboldened tomorrow." -- Bill Clinton in 1998
In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including Al Qaeda members, though there is apparently no evidence of his involvement in the terrible events of September 11, 2001. It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons. Should he succeed in that endeavor, he could alter the political and security landscape of the Middle East, which as we know all too well affects American security." -- Hillary Clinton, October 10, 2002
"I am absolutely convinced that there are weapons...I saw evidence back in 1998 when we would see the inspectors being barred from gaining entry into a warehouse for three hours with trucks rolling up and then moving those trucks out." -- Clinton's Secretary of Defense William Cohen in April of 2003
"Iraq is not the only nation in the world to possess weapons of mass destruction, but it is the only nation with a leader who has used them against his own people." -- Tom Daschle in 1998
"Saddam Hussein's regime represents a grave threat to America and our allies, including our vital ally, Israel. For more than two decades, Saddam Hussein has sought weapons of mass destruction through every available means. We know that he has chemical and biological weapons. He has already used them against his neighbors and his own people, and is trying to build more. We know that he is doing everything he can to build nuclear weapons, and we know that each day he gets closer to achieving that goal." -- John Edwards, Oct 10, 2002
"The debate over Iraq is not about politics. It is about national security. It should be clear that our national security requires Congress to send a clear message to Iraq and the world: America is united in its determination to eliminate forever the threat of Iraq's weapons of mass destruction." -- John Edwards, Oct 10, 2002
"I share the administration's goals in dealing with Iraq and its weapons of mass destruction." -- Dick Gephardt in September of 2002
"Iraq does pose a serious threat to the stability of the Persian Gulf and we should organize an international coalition to eliminate his access to weapons of mass destruction. Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to completely deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power." -- Al Gore, 2002
"We are in possession of what I think to be compelling evidence that Saddam Hussein has, and has had for a number of years, a developing capacity for the production and storage of weapons of mass destruction." -- Bob Graham, December 2002
force - if necessary - to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security." -- John F. Kerry, Oct 2002
"The threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real, but as I said, it is not new. It has been with us since the end of that war, and particularly in the last 4 years we know after Operation Desert Fox failed to force him to reaccept them, that he has continued to build those weapons. He has had a free hand for 4 years to reconstitute these weapons, allowing the world, during the interval, to lose the focus we had on weapons of mass destruction and the issue of proliferation." -- John Kerry, October 9, 2002
"(W)e need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime. We all know the litany of his offenses. He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation. ...And now he is miscalculating America's response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction. That is why the world, through the United Nations Security Council, has spoken with one voice, demanding that Iraq disclose its weapons programs and disarm. So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real, but it is not new. It has been with us since the end of the Persian Gulf War." -- John Kerry, Jan 23, 2003
"Over the years, Iraq has worked to develop nuclear, chemical and biological weapons. During 1991 - 1994, despite Iraq's denials, U.N. inspectors discovered and dismantled a large network of nuclear facilities that Iraq was using to develop nuclear weapons. Various reports indicate that Iraq is still actively pursuing nuclear weapons capability. There is no reason to think otherwise. Beyond nuclear weapons, Iraq has actively pursued biological and chemical weapons.U.N. inspectors have said that Iraq's claims about biological weapons is neither credible nor verifiable. In 1986, Iraq used chemical weapons against Iran, and later, against its own Kurdish population. While weapons inspections have been successful in the past, there have been no inspections since the end of 1998. There can be no doubt that Iraq has continued to pursue its goal of obtaining weapons of mass destruction." -- Patty Murray, October 9, 2002
"As a member of the House Intelligence Committee, I am keenly aware that the proliferation of chemical and biological weapons is an issue of grave importance to all nations. Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process." -- Nancy Pelosi, December 16, 1998
Democrat LIE now that the Iraq war was about George Bush, but most of these quotes that support the idea of Saddam holding WMD and needing to be deposed are from years before GWB took office.
Trying to pin the "pointless death and destruction" on GWB alone is garbage and if you're old enough to have been politically aware in the late 90's you know this.
Good job, johnny. The Dims need a reminder now and then of the rhetoric that preceded the Iraq invasion. High-ranking Dims, using the same intelligence reports as the White House, saw the danger and goaded GWB into taking military action. What Saddam did with the WMDs he used on his own people is still a mystery.
I wonder who wrote Murray's release back then, as she doesn't appear to be bright enough to compose anything that makes sense.
Murray did get some national exposure last Friday when Ann Coulter, as a guest on Sean Hannity's radio program, quipped this priceless nugget, "Patty Murray is the stupidest person ever elected to the United States Congress." I laughed so hard at that one I almost fell off the tractor seat. In retrospect, there is nothing at all humerous at being "represented" by a socialist half-wit like Murray.
13. PUBLIC LAW 107-243--OCT. 16, 2002
Our invasion of Iraq was not based on a public relations drive; it was based on Public Law 107-243, otherwise known as the Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq, passed by the 107th Congress in October of 2002 . (Herein referred to as the "Authorization".) It passed the House with a vote of 296 to 133 (by 69%) and the Senate with a vote of 77 to 23 (by 77%), including 58% of Senate Democrats. In short, it was overwhelming; it was bipartisan; and it was law.
Try as they might to deny it, democrats were involved and active participants, until the next election cycle.
Democrats took over congress in 2007 - almost FOUR years ago. Where were the bills to fix the housing problem? - Oops, according to Barney Frank there wasn't a problem.
The financial problem? Oh yeah, they were afraid of a Bush veto, so why do anything?
Once the Democrats had super majorities in Congress, whose fault was it for stalled legislation? The other guy, always the other guy.
Yes, the economy tanked in 2008 on Bush's watch, but it also tanked under the watch of a Democratic controlled Congress. The large jobless numbers and astronomically huge defecits have occurred on Obama's watch and under the watch of a Democratic controlled Congress.
That's goota look good on the ol' resume, right Patty?
Well Murray is in the lead according to an Elway poll.
One doesn't need to be a psychic to know why. All along poor plodding Dino Rossi has been the school nerd while Murray's camp has been slapping "Kick Me" signs on him. He didn;t have a clue. The "feel good", "nice guy" ads don't work! Rossi hasn't the guts to win and now he has been defined (falsely) by Murray's ads.
I am glad I didn't pour my money down the drain on this party establishment LOSER! It is the Titanic ladies and gents, strike up the band.
But hey, maybe after he loses, he can mop up the floors at Seattle Center again.
"Yeah, you guys have real issues with us liberals recalling what a miserable failure his immediate predecessor was. Well, we didn't vote for W., and so we don't share your moral culpability for all the pointless death and destruction he caused. Cry us a river."
As usual tensor, you are a liar.
How did DEMOCRATS vote on Iraq War???
"Without question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime ... He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation ... And now he is miscalculating America's response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction ... So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real..."
- Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan. 23. 2003 | Source
"I will be voting to give the President of the United States the authority to use force -- if necessary -- to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security."
- Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9, 2002 | Source
"One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them. That is our bottom line."
- President Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998 | Source
"If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program."
- President Bill Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998 | Source
"We must stop Saddam from ever again jeopardizing the stability and security of his neighbors with weapons of mass destruction."
- Madeline Albright, Feb 1, 1998 | Source
"He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten times since 1983."
- Sandy Berger, Clinton National Security Adviser, Feb, 18, 1998 | Source
"[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs."
Letter to President Clinton.
- (D) Senators Carl Levin, Tom Daschle, John Kerry, others, Oct. 9, 1998 | Source
"Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process."
- Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D, CA), Dec. 16, 1998 | Source
"Hussein has ... chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass destruction and palaces for his cronies."
- Madeline Albright, Clinton Secretary of State, Nov. 10, 1999 | Source
"We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the mandate of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass destruction and th! e means of delivering them."
- Sen. Carl Levin (D, MI), Sept. 19, 2002 | Source
"We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country."
- Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002 | Source
"Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power."
- Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002 | Source
"We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction."
- Sen. Ted Kennedy (D, MA), Sept. 27, 2002 | Source
"The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October of 1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retains some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his chemical and biological warfare capabilities. Intelligence reports indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons..."
- Sen. Robert Byrd (D, WV), Oct. 3, 2002 | Source
"There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years ... We also should remember we have always underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction."
- Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D, WV), Oct 10, 2002 | Source
"In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al Qaeda members ... It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons."
- Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct 10, 2002 | Source
"We are in possession of what I think to be compelling evidence that Saddam Hussein has, and has had for a number of years, a developing capacity for the production and storage of weapons of mass destruction."
- Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL), Dec. 8, 2002 | Source
16. As I believe the latest Elway poll shows...Rossi's 'handlers' aren't performing up to par with presentation. Murray's ad's are indeed having more impact and will continue to do so, unless Dino's PR folks start doin their homework. :(
Do you want to talk about pointless deaths? Obama has increased the casualty rate in Afghanistan to TWICE what it was under 8 years of Bush.
:As a consensus builds that American troops are struggling mightily against the Taliban, if not losing the war outright in Afghanistan, the death toll is soaring, and it has been since Barack Obama became president.
On Friday, three more American soldiers died, bringing the number of fatalities to 66 for July, the deadliest month on record in the war.
In June, 60 American troops were killed. That had been the bloodiest month.
The escalating deaths match the escalation of the war under the Obama administration. As of Friday, according to icasualities.org, there have been 1,212 American military fatalities in Afghanistan, while total coalition military deaths stand at 1,976."
Tensor: You have, by now, put up several comments, none of them on-topic.
Let me suggest that, if you make another comment, that you either defend or criticize Senator Murray's overall record on spending, especially on pork barrel projects.
And if there are other topics that you would like to discuss here, send me an email and I'll consider putting up an open post. (I've made this offer several times here -- and no one has taken me up on it.) I can't do that every day, but I am willing to do it from time to time.
19. Patty Murray is out there today begging Republicans to clean up the mess Congress made when it passed Obamacare and created the very onerous tax reporting burdens on small business.
20. Where's ROSSI ????
I had hoped he'd actually start a campaign after Labor Day....but I guess not.
Latest Elway poll with 500 persons surveyed has Murray at a 9% lead BUT Rasmussen with 750 people surveyed has Rossi at a 3 point lead and Survey USA with 618 surveyed has Rossi at a 7 point lead.
If you are going to put any kind of credibility into polls you should look at ALL the polls. (Real Clear Politics puts up summaries of ALL the most recent polls for all the races in every state) Then you need to look at the track record of the group taking the poll.
As a sidenote, I was polled last week on the Hobbs / Schmidt race. ... As a matter of fact the SAME polling group called me a total of 5 times in a two hour period. Obviously I was a bit irritated after the 2nd call but I wonder, had I taken time to be surveyed 5 times and if I had given the same answers I would certainly think the survey results would be more than a little skewed.
Bottom line, is don't let polling numbers tell you who is going to win the vote... Patty Murray would love all of us to believe that she has this all sewn up and discourage us from voting thinking it was a lost cause. The Dems would love to try and paint Rossi as a loser but let's not fall into that trap. Read some of the comments from Seattle in response to todays Seattle Times article on Rossi. I can tell you that the tone has changed of those comments are 200 degress different than they were 2 years ago. Patty's in big, big trouble and
Judging by the numbers I see on RealClearPolitics, it seems that the Elway poll always tilts more to the left than the Rasmussen and other polls.
Perhaps someone knowledgable about polling techniques will comment on why this is so?
23. I haven't seen or heard from Rossi in months. No word of upcoming personal appearances or stump speeches, no quotes in local newspapers, no evidence that he is taking this seriously. Is he hoping to just ride the Republican bandwagon to victory? I would think by now we'd see some major ads attacking Murray's Marxist voting record. Is he saving his petrol for the last hill?
24. And how surprising is that ?! I do Like the taxpayers ad on the T.V.
Please. Let's stop the DELUSION that the polls are skewed. There are SEVERAL polls showing Rossi LOSING. This should be an easy one. But they refuse to tell the truth about Murray and let her lies sit out there UNANSWERED!
It is too late now. The opinion of Rossi is already formed. Didier would NEVER have allowed this to happen. NEVER!
Can someone verify if Steve Smith has ANY affliation with the Rossi campaign?
Steve Smith is a card carrying RINO, McCain groupie, conservative basher. If he is involved, horrid move, Dino.....
Dino brings Scott Brown in???? Scott Brown is not a conservative. Anothher horrid move, Dino.....
Better get with the Tea Party movement tsunami, Dino........and fast......
I do not have a good feeling about this...
#26- BTW - It's Steve Schmidt of the failed McCain for President campaign. Scott Brown is fine in WA, because he is not seen as a radical by on-the fence independents and has charisma.
However, Schmidt, who is an advisor (not the chief campaign strategist) was not a good selection based on his recent track record, IMO.
This morning, per Tom Gott, Deputy Campaign Manager for Dino, no Schmidt involvement. Period. Whew...good news
OK. Scott Brown is OK. Fiscal conservative... Complaint withdrawn.
29. Dino Rossi is fading. If he wants to resuscitate his candidacy, he needs to lure prominent moderate Republican women -- like Susan Collins or Olympia Snowe or Lisa Murkowski (probably too busy) or Susan Molinari (she's got lots of free time) to come to Washington on his behalf. In order to win this election, against a female incumbent, he needs to attract female voters. Not a majority of them, but more than, say, 40% of them.