“It’s unbelievable. It’s not right. It’s deceitful,” said Jackie Thrasher, a former Democratic legislator in northwest Phoenix.... “...What’s happening here just doesn’t wash. It doesn’t pass the smell test.”Doesn't wash! Doesn't pass the smell test! Wow. Just... wow.
७ सप्टेंबर, २०१०
Democrats attack homeless as unserious and fake.
In Arizona.
याची सदस्यत्व घ्या:
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा (Atom)
पोस्ट्स
४२ टिप्पण्या:
Republicans are going full metal Alinsky this fall.
Unfortunate choice of words. I would love for one of the homeless guys to win, though. Maybe the tarot card reader.
ahhh yes. I guess this passes the republican 'clever' test so ... I mean there is no law against it.
There is no law about using people is there? Certainly decency hasn't any place on that good old right side of the aisle does it? Just checkin'.
i guess he didn't want them to run on the Tea Party ticket...although more than a mental match...
This is outrageous, because we all know that Democrats would NEVER, ever encourage 3rd party candidates to run in order to split the Republican vote.
I mean, they wouldn't do anything like that today, would they?
WV: yagging
I'd like the Green Candidates to win and be rabidly anti-Republican and anti-Democratic. That would be nice.
The Democratic Party is fuming over Mr. May’s tactics and those of at least two other Republicans who helped recruit candidates to the Green Party, which does not have the resources to put candidates on ballots around the state and thus creates the opportunity for write-in contenders like the Mill Rats to easily win primaries and get their names on the ballot for November.
The GOP is merely spreading the wealth to help the Green Party get candidates.
Isn't that what the Dems are all about? Spreading the wealth and helping your neighbor?
It's wrong to imply that the homeless are smelly.
They're not. They're just differently scented.
“It’s unbelievable. It’s not right. It’s deceitful,” said Jackie Thrasher, a former Democratic legislator in northwest Phoenix...
That's right! Because voluntarily donated funds to an election is morally wrong.
But taking the taxpayers property by force of government power and using the money for government (publicly) funded campaigns is morally correct.
The NYTs is merely providing cover for Democrat voter fraud this November. Weasels like HD and Alpha need to believe Goldstein is cheating, to justify their own cheating.
Democrat Ethics: you can do anything you believe your opponent will do.
Don't the homeless have a right to run for public office? Isn't holding public office an employment choice? Or is that only reserved for Democrats- just like dirty campaign tricks and running false candidates.
On November 5th this year, the Democrats will unexpectedly find thousands of ballots in the trunk of Sen. Franken's car.
You know when Republicans are defending the homeless, the rest of their agenda is, of course, pure bullshit as always.
Let's make fun of her like a dog.
Seems like I've heard of something Republicans do to help the homeless. What is it they call it? Welfare? No. Food stamps? No. Oh yeah, now I remember. It's charity. I understand that's foreign to Democrats though. Is that right, Garage? And you also agree that it's ok to stereotype I see.
There surely is no decency on the right at all. Unlike those paragons on the left.
Wait, what's this about The Tea Party? A fake Tea Party set up in Michigan to siphon votes away from Republicans? Huh.
I notice the NYT didn't enable comments on this article. I guess they don't want anyone pointing out the fake Tea Party candidates run by the Democrats.
There is a Marie Antoinette quality to all of this.
"unserious and fake"
[cough]**obama**[/cough]
What is wrong with you people? There are no homeless people when a good, kind and generous Democrat is in the White House.
Has the New York Times ever bothered to cover the fake "Tea Party" in Michigan, which was being pushed by Democrats?
I can't find a NYT story on Google News at all, let alone one that ran on page 1A.
I'd call it strange that they seem to play up a trick by the GOP and ignore one led by the Dems, but I'm just not surprised.
Not homeless, 'differently housed'.
We're celebrating domicile diversity.
Wait, what's this about The Tea Party? A fake Tea Party set up in Michigan to siphon votes away from Republicans? Huh.
Well, silly boy. THAT was different. Those people have homes and stuff and aren't smelly weirdos who are supposed to know their place in society...... which is to be used as clubs and as impersonal icons against the eeeeeevil conservatives.
“They don’t know Green from red.”
The language is also offensive to differently color-sighted people.
I love it when leftard troll snark backfires. Seems to be happening a lot lately.
When I read this (appeared in our local Arizona Republic ONE WEEK AGO, NYT just "catching up" I guess) I thought it odd.
This wikipedia entry does a good job of reviewing Steve May's history in AZ politics. He would not be your "typical" party operative. I would qualify him as a more moderate Republican or more likely a libertarian. And though AZ has some history with openly gay Republicans, its not a concept "embraced" by the party apparatus.
So I know some would like to assign a mirror-image-to-the-Democrats-fake-Tea-Party narrative. I would suggest this story is more complicated than that and has as much to do with the ease of getting a third party candidate on the ballot in AZ and the "mavericky" nature of Steve May.
“They don’t know Green from red.”
Is there any difference between "Green" and "Red"?
Democrats seem to get really angry when their own tactics are used against them.
I am sure WI Dems who find this to be a dirty trick will not vote in the upcoming GOP gubernatorial primary, instead they will studiously examine the issues behind the Dem primary for state treasurer. However, if they are in Milwaukee County and want to remain true to the Dem Party they will have the opportunity to vote out a Black County Sheriff for not being Black enough.
I'm trying to find the "Title" of your thread (democrats attack homeless...) in the article. i can't seem to locate it.
I think the democrats in the article spoke about republicans ginning up candidates..which was clearly the case and launched no attack on the homeless.
A tad of accuracy here might be useful Ann and if Meade needs some blood meat in the morning, give him some bacon.
HenHouse,
Did you find any bigots under your bed when you checked last night?
"Doesn't wash! Doesn't pass the smell test!"
They're French?
Why do you have to keep attacking Meade all the time hd?
I think that this comes under the heading of "you can't cheat an honest man."
The Democrats who are upset are upset because they were counting on uninformed party-line votes.
I sort of like, too, how HD's first reaction is to defend the homeless that are being "used". The "homeless" people in the article seemed like pretty normal people, if colorful. I doubt they'd appreciate being defended as if they are victims and child-like persons.
"Certainly decency hasn't any place on that good old right side of the aisle does it?"
Fuck you, asshole.
Does that answer your question?
We're going the prick route this time - decency be damned - which worked for you guys so well in getting Barack Obama shoehorned in.
Goose ... meet Gander.
And remember House, there is no fucking crying in baseball, dude.
New "Hussein" Ham said...
"We're going the prick route this time.."
this time? opposed to what other time when you haven't?
once a prick always a prick I always say.
ya'betcha!
I wonder why people like Garage and HD always attact the right rather than defend the left? I know it's difficult HD but please expaim why it's okay for the Donks to try to put up fake TEA Party candidates but this attempt by a Republican is so downright evil. Please be specific and cite the times when you have attacked said Democrats as you do the Replicans.
Oh, that's right, hypocracy is only a club against the right. For the left hypocracy is a badge of honor.
Democrats seem to get really angry when their own tactics are used against them.
I wonder if those upset by this are also upset that Harry Reid apparently funded negative ads during the Republican primary against Sharon Angle's major opponent in order to get her as his opponent. And, he got what he wanted. We shall see if that was sufficient to overcome his being a major force behind so much legislation hated by his constituents.
I think the Michigan thing got tossed out after a challenge so it is old news and frankly wasn't too smart but there it is.
This stuff, picking folks for the mere sport of then exposing them and their lives is the difference.
I'm very very sorry you don't see the difference. And this crap about "why don't I attack my own"? You do that for me. I pay you back. What don't you get?
PS and after searching through the blogs and "news" i didn't see much constranation on the right side of things about Arizona. None at all.
Any my post was mainly about Ann distorting the article. Democrats didn't attack homeless as unserious and fake. They went after the body of nominees put up by the Republican as 'unserious and fake' to which the republican funding fellow supplied the questions for the press right on cue.
Why is it so hard for you to see that you are being used.
HD;
Democrats didn't attack homeless as unserious and fake.
from the AZ Republic article I referenced:
The state Democratic Party is alleging possible voter fraud in what it called a scheme to undermine its candidates by recruiting "sham" Green Party hopefuls.
You do understand that "sham" and "fake" are synonyms, don't you?
Seems to me like all Steve May is doing is picking up the slack now that ACORN is no longer a player on the political scene.
@c3
Please read carefully. where is the phrase "attack homeless as unserious and fake" used? where?
of course the ploy was a fraud and and a shame but democrats didn't attack the condidates but rather the using of them by a republican as pawns in his little game.
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा