November 01, 2009
— DrewM Not officially (yet) but maybe behind the scenes.
The Watertown Daily Times, which had endorsed switched their endorsement to the Democrat today and included this tidbit.
During the day Saturday, she began to quietly and thoughtfully encourage her supporters to vote for Democrat William L. Owens.
I can't find any statement from her to that but it might be a behind the scenes deal as the paper says.
Scozzafava's husband, labor activist Ron McDougall, did come out for Owens.
"This has been a difficult day for my family. But the needs and concerns of the men and women of the 23rd Congressional District remain paramount," McDougall said. "As such, I wholeheartedly and without reservation endorse the candidacy of Bill Owens."As a life-long labor activist, I know that Bill Owens understands the issues important to working people. On the other hand, Doug Hoffman has little regard for the interests of workers."
"Hoffmans opposition to the Employee Free Choice Act, coupled with his support for the failed policies of the Bush Administration make him a poor choice to serve the citizens of the 23rd Congressional District.
Hopefully the Republican county chairs, who stuck the district with Scozzafava will publicly come out for Hoffman.
There's no doubt some of Dede's liberal supporters and personal friends will go to Owens but the rank and file Republican voters need to know it's okay to vote Hoffman.
Posted by: DrewM at
07:24 AM
| Comments (206)
Post contains 240 words, total size 2 kb.
Posted by: Blazer at November 01, 2009 07:29 AM (+FzLa)
Posted by: sissoed at November 01, 2009 07:30 AM (XpBZo)
Posted by: trentk269 at November 01, 2009 07:30 AM (xyEsR)
Egads, this paints Newt and the NRCC/RNC as rubes easily duped.
Posted by: Intrepid at November 01, 2009 07:31 AM (92zkk)
Posted by: sissoed at November 01, 2009 07:32 AM (XpBZo)
The R party needs to expand in some districts to take back the house, but not in this district not with candidates who don't seem to share any sense of principals of the party other than convenience.
In my eyes, he apparent willingness to back the other side here is a tell.
Posted by: ElamBend at November 01, 2009 07:32 AM (UAiWm)
Posted by: eman at November 01, 2009 07:33 AM (ZzgoC)
Posted by: Unclefacts, Summoner of Meteors at November 01, 2009 07:33 AM (erIg9)
Well we know she's not supporting the conservative candidate. I saw the video of her yesterday conceding where she was all red-nosed and puffy faced from crying her eyes out. Me thinks she didn't like the shit sandwich she was forced to eat and is now full of sour grapes.
Excellent call Newt. Your powers of observation are astounding !
Posted by: Blazer at November 01, 2009 07:34 AM (+FzLa)
Posted by: Unclefacts, Summoner of Meteors at November 01, 2009 07:36 AM (erIg9)
Conservatives are told to allow for a "Big Tent", but when RINOs are faced with the same choice, they seem to go Democrat.
Posted by: Intrepid at November 01, 2009 07:37 AM (92zkk)
Posted by: eman at November 01, 2009 07:37 AM (ZzgoC)
Posted by: Concious, but hungover at November 01, 2009 07:37 AM (kn+jW)
Posted by: the real joe at November 01, 2009 07:38 AM (nbxDI)
I'm not willing to call this a done deal because I've read a few things along the lines of this not being as die-hard a Republican district as we're all declaring it, but a decent amount of Scozzafava's support (or any unknown representative candidate's support) had to have come from the mere fact she had an "R" behing her name and now that will be out of the picture.
P.S., Party leaders, here's a possible test you can go by to keep this whole mess from blowing out of control: If a candidate would support the Democrat over another conservative (Scozzafava, Chafee), you probably shouldn't nominate them.
Posted by: AD at November 01, 2009 07:39 AM (/M3Gr)
Posted by: dvdivx at November 01, 2009 07:40 AM (w2PvW)
Posted by: Intrepid at November 01, 2009 12:31 PM (92zkk)
At what point do you quit becoming "dupes" and start counting as willing enablers?
Posted by: AD at November 01, 2009 07:41 AM (/M3Gr)
We'll now find out how much of her support in the area was based on support for her principles vs people just pushing the button next to the 'R'.
Posted by: mrkwong at November 01, 2009 07:42 AM (G8Eo0)
Posted by: Bill R. at November 01, 2009 07:44 AM (EhlQq)
Hey genius, what do my personal preferences and principals have to do with the actions of 11 county chairmen in West Bumfuck, NY?
What else is there to do at this point other than hope they do something useful?
I didn't write the fucking rules that allows county chairs to pick candidates in Special Elections. In fact, I called them out over in the NY 20 race.
But none of that matters because I'm not the Angriest of the Angry Authentic Conservatives.
Why don't you call them up and issue your Authentic Conservative Important Action Alert to them? I'm sure they are just dying to hear from you.
Posted by: DrewM. at November 01, 2009 07:44 AM (ur6Ar)
Newt's not evil, he merely (for lack of a better term) "went native" in D.C. circa 1997 and hasn't been the same guy since.
He was reckless is in his personal actions and lost his spine in his leadership of the party and, for our good and his, he shouldn't be foisted into that sort of leadership position again.
Posted by: AD at November 01, 2009 07:45 AM (/M3Gr)
Posted by: eman at November 01, 2009 07:45 AM (ZzgoC)
AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!! STOP IT, YOU'RE KILLING ME!
Posted by: OregonMuse at November 01, 2009 07:45 AM (eR37w)
Posted by: AD at November 01, 2009 12:41 PM (/M3Gr)
Back during the Shamnesty days was when they established their true, and unmistakeable, Vichy credentials.
Posted by: progressoverpeace at November 01, 2009 07:46 AM (A46hP)
But, don't worry, it makes us a "non-purity" party when the "electable moderates" start stumping for the Democrats.
Posted by: Techie at November 01, 2009 07:46 AM (cxW4X)
Posted by: Zombie Quisling at November 01, 2009 07:47 AM (sx341)
Posted by: George Orwell at November 01, 2009 07:48 AM (AZGON)
Posted by: Techie at November 01, 2009 07:48 AM (cxW4X)
Posted by: Intrepid at November 01, 2009 07:48 AM (92zkk)
Posted by: Concious, but hungover at November 01, 2009 07:48 AM (kn+jW)
Posted by: Vichy Conservative at November 01, 2009 07:49 AM (+FzLa)
Posted by: Big Fat Meanie at November 01, 2009 07:49 AM (DPM1U)
AD,
Actually, it's the opposite. She's represented a good part of that district for 10 years. They do know her.
My guess is there thought is, 'Who is this Doug Hoffman guy running down someone we know and kind of like and why the hell should I care what Palin and the rest think?"
My experience is people don't like be told by outsiders what to think of someone they already no. That was always a bit of the danger in going with Hoffman, there could be a local backlash to perceived meddling. It was worth the risk but it shouldn't be ignored either.
That's why Hoffman has to be very nice about her now and he needs the local GOP, not just the national GOP, to bless him.
Posted by: DrewM. at November 01, 2009 07:49 AM (ur6Ar)
Posted by: robtr at November 01, 2009 07:49 AM (fwSHf)
Posted by: Peaches at November 01, 2009 07:49 AM (9Wv2j)
What's going to happen is what usually happens whenever a principled conservative wins: the RINOs will defect and actively support the Dem.
Posted by: OregonMuse at November 01, 2009 07:49 AM (eR37w)
Posted by: Techie at November 01, 2009 07:50 AM (cxW4X)
10 Newt circa 1994 and Newt now are so different, it makes me wonder if he's had some sort of head injury.
There's another explanation. Remember the movie Men in Black? There was a scene where Tommy Lee Jones' character was showing videos of some of the aliens in human form and I think Newt was one of them (along with Stallone and a few others). So, it could be that the 1994 Newt was killed and replaced by an alien, which would explain his actions from 1996-ish to now.
Posted by: Kratos (on the back of Gaia, scaling Mt Olympus) at November 01, 2009 07:51 AM (9hSKh)
Posted by: eman at November 01, 2009 07:51 AM (ZzgoC)
Posted by: progressoverpeace at November 01, 2009 07:52 AM (A46hP)
Posted by: Peaches at November 01, 2009 12:49 PM (9Wv2j)
I never felt bad for her and said so yesterday after ace said he did. I saw this crap coming from a mile away. The mask is off.
Posted by: Blazer at November 01, 2009 07:52 AM (+FzLa)
37 Because, New Yorkers have a rich tradition of not voting for people not just from their district, but not even from their state (RFK, Hillary Clinton).
True, Techie, but maybe only liberal Dems get that pass.
Posted by: Kratos (on the back of Gaia, scaling Mt Olympus) at November 01, 2009 07:53 AM (9hSKh)
Posted by: Dr. Spank at November 01, 2009 07:54 AM (muUqs)
Posted by: RushBabe at November 01, 2009 07:54 AM (LKkE8)
Posted by: OregonMuse at November 01, 2009 12:49 PM (eR37w)
Which is why RINOs can DIAF.
Posted by: Unclefacts, Summoner of Meteors at November 01, 2009 07:54 AM (erIg9)
the same band of butt-pirates... just trading off the Captains Chair............
She still has a place at the trough in Albany.... so Sheldon Silver will give her a nice reach around I'm sure...
We should try to track her dealings in the ass-embly.
;
;
No Honor among these thieves.
Go DOUG!
Posted by: F*ckin' Marvellous at November 01, 2009 07:55 AM (8iTbj)
Posted by: Kratos (on the back of Gaia, scaling Mt Olympus) at November 01, 2009 07:55 AM (9hSKh)
Posted by: eman at November 01, 2009 07:55 AM (ZzgoC)
Drew, I just don't believe the average rank and file Republican pays that close attention to their state assemblywoman. If I'm wrong on this, I'm wrong, but if you went to the average Republican voter in January 2009 and said "who is the person who represents you?" I'd be surprised if a third of them could name her (or any other person at that level, except for maybe, and this is a big maybe, the party leaders).
It's a Republican vs. Democrat thing and that's it.
Posted by: AD at November 01, 2009 07:58 AM (/M3Gr)
Posted by: progressoverpeace at November 01, 2009 12:52 PM (A46hP)
These type of derogatory comments are unhelpful!
Posted by: A typical white "drawing a blank" comment at November 01, 2009 07:58 AM (kn+jW)
We have to wonder about the agenda behind her candidacy if she and her husband now are supporting Owens over Hoffman. If they would toss their weight (heh) behind the lib instead of the conservative, then she would have been a sure Democrat vote in most any piece of legislation congress would take on.
Posted by: Intrepid at November 01, 2009 07:59 AM (92zkk)
He's a little on the conservative side for her tastes.
Posted by: DoDoGuRu at November 01, 2009 07:59 AM (Xdxf8)
Posted by: eman at November 01, 2009 12:55 PM (ZzgoC)
HEY!
Posted by: Spector, Snowe and Collins at November 01, 2009 07:59 AM (erIg9)
Posted by: MacDaddy McDiddy at November 01, 2009 08:00 AM (GfYt/)
This shows here real intent and it also puts to bed ANY thought that she is a hero to the Republican Party. I expect she got out because the Party finally got the message as to what kind of candidate she was, big government big labor Democrat.
It also puts to bed commie carls argument that she was a victim of big religion
And as I said this morning, how long will be before she formally switches parties and if she does, will we hear about it?
Posted by: Vic at November 01, 2009 08:00 AM (CDUiN)
So Dede's union thug husband is endorsing Owens the lawyer who ensured the Commutair employees got screwed?
Posted by: Thom at November 01, 2009 08:00 AM (FU425)
And when I refresh this page, ironically enough I've been getting an "operation aborted" error message.
Posted by: andycanuck at November 01, 2009 08:01 AM (2qU2d)
Posted by: shill finder at November 01, 2009 08:01 AM (DIYmd)
Posted by: Kratos (on the back of Gaia, scaling Mt Olympus) at November 01, 2009 12:55 PM (9hSKh)
Kathy Bates in Misery is Megan Fox when compared to Dede!
Posted by: Conciouse, but hungover at November 01, 2009 08:01 AM (kn+jW)
;">
As I mentioned yesterday, it shouldn't be a matter of hoping the local GOP officials back a candidate whose philosophy is consistent with the party platform, the RNC needs to exert pressure and influence until they do.
That's why we're losing, folks. The Democrats' party organization is effective - ours blows.
Posted by: Y-not at November 01, 2009 08:01 AM (sey23)
Posted by: Fresh Air at November 01, 2009 08:01 AM (7r9DK)
Wow. Just wow.
"I can't win, so darn you, neither will you, filthy conservative republican!"
If this isn't the most telling statement about what a huge screw up this was for the GOP, I don't know what it.
Posted by: Mouse at November 01, 2009 08:02 AM (GF971)
Posted by: LtE113(Mike in Chicago) at November 01, 2009 08:04 AM (3NFq/)
Aside from the fact that she reportedly smelt of old celery.
These are the people we really need to clean out.
Posted by: Unclefacts, Meteor Summoner, Lover of Bacons at November 01, 2009 08:04 AM (erIg9)
Posted by: AmishDude at November 01, 2009 08:05 AM (ItSLQ)
Aside from the fact that she reportedly smelt of old celery.
These are the people we really need to clean out.
Posted by: Unclefacts, Meteor Summoner, Lover of Bacons at November 01, 2009 01:04 PM (erIg9)
A+
Posted by: Conciouse, but hungover at November 01, 2009 08:06 AM (kn+jW)
I don't see this as an ideological purity issues, it's an organizational effectiveness issue.
There's a party platform. Scuzzywuzzy was off-base on major issues/philosophies. The local party hacks should feel an obligation to choose candidates that are at least somewhat consistent with that platform.
If they don't, it's because the national party structure has not been effective at using carrots and sticks to motivate these local hacks.
Posted by: Y-not at November 01, 2009 08:07 AM (sey23)
Uhm, shouldn't they do this anyway, without having to be told it's ok to do so? You know, because it's important to elect someone who would caucus with the Republicans in the House, instead of with the Democrats.
Posted by: Intrepid at November 01, 2009 08:07 AM (92zkk)
This rural district depends on the federal government for an investment in Fort Drum and its soldiers,
Um, RIGHT. Cause when you want the -military- to be well-funded, make sure to vote for Democrats!
Qwinn
Posted by: Qwinn at November 01, 2009 08:08 AM (SxA2Q)
Posted by: koopy at November 01, 2009 08:09 AM (+ckmu)
Posted by: Newyorkconservative[There is such a creature as a new york conservative?] at November 01, 2009 08:11 AM (0wI8P)
I'm not willing to call this a done deal.....
Commie Carl is saying the Dems are calling it a done deal.
Posted by: Vic at November 01, 2009 08:11 AM (CDUiN)
This rural district depends on the federal government for an investment in Fort Drum and its soldiers,
Um, RIGHT. Cause when you want the -military- to be well-funded, make sure to vote for Democrats!
Qwinn
Posted by: Qwinn at November 01, 2009 01:08 PM (SxA2Q)
Fort Drum is the home of 10th Mountain. It ain't goin' nowhere no anytime soon. Trust me.
Posted by: Blazer at November 01, 2009 08:12 AM (+FzLa)
I wonder if the NY Times will get around to mentioning that someone besides Sarah endorsed Hoffman.
Like the former GOVERNOR of NY?
And how long do they get to call flaming liberal Republicans "moderates".
WTF? She supports card check, is that "moderate"?
She sleeps with a union organizer, wonder if he's as fat as she is.
The only thing "moderate" about Dee Dee is the size of her brain and bra.
Posted by: Kemp at November 01, 2009 08:12 AM (2+9Yx)
Looks like nobody's said "bitter hag" yet, so I will.
Bitter hag.
Maybe if she belonged to the party that matched her principles and voting record, she's have had a shot at winning an election. Jeez.
Posted by: Mouse at November 01, 2009 08:13 AM (GF971)
Posted by: Tweet Knows at November 01, 2009 08:14 AM (f8+ox)
Posted by: Curly Mustard at November 01, 2009 08:15 AM (sOpAl)
Reagan: So, satan, what do we have to do?
Me: Ok. Parable: unbuckle your strap-on and sit on the porch swing with the church-lady-in-waiting and promise her you'll take care of her spawn if she unlocks her chastity belt.
Reagan: so, metaphorically speaking, promise the paranoic nutbag bible-thumpers no more baby-killing, and...
Me: ...no tits on TV
Reagan: Bingo!
Me: sweeten the deal, though. Tell her there's a mustachiod man with greasy black her in a trenchcoat who wants to eat her pussy, and her child
Reagan: terrorism!
Me: exactly...the external threat.
Reagan: oh, you little devil. Internal enemy?
Me: the press, fat black mothers, Mexicans...
Reagan: Welfare cheats!
Me: and a war, an endless war.
Reagan: we can put the unaborted assholes on the payroll as soldiers
Me: Good Morning In America
Reagan: Forever!
Me: well, no. Eventually, the bitch you nailed will lose her teeth and her pension.
Reagan: uh-oh
Me: chickens will come back home to roost. Fool me twice...
Reagan: then time for a third party!
Me: Sarah!!2012!!
Reagan: whatever. I'll get mine.
Me: alright. you know the drill...
Reagan (bends over, tightly shuts eyes, receiving the spiked cock of satan): well, you gotta pay to play
Me: mrrrrmphhhnphhhaaa....
Posted by: Lucifer at November 01, 2009 08:16 AM (SUU19)
So she supports card check and her husband is a fat-cat union operative. Talk about a conflict of interest and letting something corrupt your principles.
That is if Dee Dee had any principles.
Posted by: Blazer at November 01, 2009 08:16 AM (+FzLa)
For in-depth coverage of the NY-23 race and any breaking news, hit The Other McCain. (He's there in person.)
Posted by: andycanuck at November 01, 2009 08:16 AM (2qU2d)
If R's can't figure out for themselves that Scuzzyfava and Gewtros-Gewtros Numnuts are not conservatives, and not worthy of support it signals the end of the RINOP. Good fuckin' riddance. Adios Whigs. Standard-issue "lesser of Two-Evils" endorsements are what has taken the US to its' current sorry state
OK to vote for the Conservative ! Mommy, mommy ! .... may I vote for the good guy ? Puhleeze.
Telling commentary about the state of the booboisie these days
Posted by: OhioDude at November 01, 2009 08:16 AM (Ftcrf)
Posted by: eman the Moderate at November 01, 2009 08:17 AM (ZzgoC)
Posted by: Jean at November 01, 2009 08:17 AM (wNfla)
Posted by: Techie at November 01, 2009 08:20 AM (cxW4X)
What about Health Care legislation?
Is there anything Scozzafava would have opposed of the Democrat legislative agenda? Ok, so she's pro guns. But is there anything else?
It's one thing to hold one's nose and vote for someone who agrees 80/20, or even 70/30. But 40/60? Or 30/70?
Posted by: Intrepid at November 01, 2009 08:20 AM (92zkk)
It doesn't matter who Dodo supports, WE win.
If Dodo supports Owens, it will not hurt Hoffman. Her endorsement translates to 0 votes Owens. What it will do is humiliate the Republican party-leaders, both local and national. And that's GOOD.
Posted by: Tweet Knows at November 01, 2009 08:20 AM (f8+ox)
Posted by: Alex at November 01, 2009 08:24 AM (udP2l)
Posted by: bill-tb at November 01, 2009 08:24 AM (iiiMw)
Posted by: eman at November 01, 2009 08:25 AM (ZzgoC)
Posted by: JB at November 01, 2009 08:27 AM (1OoPr)
Judging by the comments on his blog, he'd probably be pelted with rotten produce if he made a public appearance.
Posted by: Peaches at November 01, 2009 08:28 AM (9Wv2j)
He could not be more wrong."
There was a civil war. It lasted about the same as Six-Day War. And, like that one, good guys won.
Posted by: JB at November 01, 2009 08:29 AM (1OoPr)
Posted by: kefka at November 01, 2009 08:30 AM (n1uMU)
Current InTrade Contract:
Hoffman at 64.8
Owens at 35.0
Posted by: JB at November 01, 2009 01:27 PM (1OoPr)
100:1 that Scuzzy shorted herself on InTrade right before her announcement. That's just the sort of stupid thing that lefties love to do. The less payoff the better. They're just like the French in that - willing to stab you in the back for a payout of pennies.
Posted by: progressoverpeace at November 01, 2009 08:31 AM (A46hP)
Posted by: eman at November 01, 2009 08:31 AM (ZzgoC)
Judging by the comments on his blog, he'd probably be pelted with rotten produce if he made a public appearance.
Posted by: Peaches at November 01, 2009 01:28 PM (9Wv2j)
Cash for Produce!
Posted by: progressoverpeace at November 01, 2009 08:32 AM (A46hP)
Her UNIONTARD hubbie said the following""As a life-long labor activist, I know that Bill Owens understands the issues important to working people. On the other hand, Doug Hoffman has little regard for the interests of workers."""
We are ALL working people. I believe he meant "losers" who cannot make in on their own.
Posted by: gus at November 01, 2009 08:33 AM (Vqruj)
Did they hand out vegetables to all the kids who came to the WH for candy?
Posted by: HeatherRadish at November 01, 2009 08:33 AM (OkT2m)
Why is it a shocker that her support will go to the other liberal in the race?
I'm not seeing why a person who liked Scozzafava on the merits would like Hoffman. [and vice versa]
Posted by: meep at November 01, 2009 08:34 AM (Jw4eT)
Have you ever seen anything like this? I know we all saw this coming from a mile away, but...
For how many years now have we've been telling the 'leaders' (read: powers that be) in the Republican party are out of touch and going in the wrong direction?
They ran an ultra-left candidate against a Democrat and they told us to shut up because they know better. Than they go as far as to smear and run negative ads against a good conservative candidate. Then, when their candidate finally drops out of the race FOR PURELY SELFISH REASONS, she and her husband support the Democrat!
We were 100% right about the fraud that is Dede Scozzofava (R) and the Republican party establishment could not have been more wrong.
Posted by: Tweet Knows at November 01, 2009 08:34 AM (f8+ox)
Posted by: RNCC at November 01, 2009 08:34 AM (9Wv2j)
I feel bad for her. Not a bad person, but the wrong person for the job. She's obviously upset about this.
I take it that's no longer 'operative,' as they say.
Posted by: Methos at November 01, 2009 08:35 AM (IoxPW)
Posted by: MPFS Indentured Fish Stick to the State at November 01, 2009 08:35 AM (PBGAP)
Posted by: Michael in MI at November 01, 2009 08:38 AM (ObTcs)
Posted by: Che Pizza at November 01, 2009 08:41 AM (4iIhs)
Posted by: eman at November 01, 2009 08:41 AM (ZzgoC)
I stand by what I said earlier: No matter who wins, this is a win for conservatives.
However, do you morons realize how BIG of a win this will be if Hoffman beats Owens...by double-digits, even?
It'll be a triple-whammy.
1) A phony (R) exposed herself and her intentions in front of the entire nation, giving us a huge 'I told you so, assholes' moment to the Republicans.
2) Not an additional Pelosi-minion in the House (in either Dodo or Owens).
3) A conservative in the House!
Posted by: Tweet Knows at November 01, 2009 08:42 AM (f8+ox)
That explains a lot.
Posted by: Che Pizza at November 01, 2009 01:41 PM (4iIhs)
Unions are usually anathema to anything conservative. One would almost think Dee Dee was a liberal plant or something.
Posted by: Blazer at November 01, 2009 08:43 AM (+FzLa)
The most important thing here, I think, is finding out what David Frum thinks and then act in concert with that.
Oh, and I like to eat my own feces.
Posted by: Dack Thrombosis at November 01, 2009 08:43 AM (P33XN)
Posted by: Michael in MI at November 01, 2009 08:44 AM (ObTcs)
If her "quiet, thoughtful" encouragement to vote for Owens ends up costing Hoffman the election, watch for a conservative backlash against the RNC.
Conservatives are told to allow for a "Big Tent", but when RINOs are faced with the same choice, they seem to go Democrat.
I am already laughing HARD at every single dumbazz who just keeps demanding we purists support the "winnable" candidate. Her husband has proven she was revving up to screw the RNC with their own money should she have won...but at least she's a Republican, oboy, so the blame can be spread to us, too, when the country goes down the crapper! Logic holes abound with this "winnable" strategy.
If this contemptible fatso was going to throw her support behind Hoffman she should have done it when she withdrew, but obviously she kept her options open so she could whore herself out to whichever party makes her the best deal. That's a recurring problem with people who don't stand on principle. A-HEM.
Posted by: barbelle at November 01, 2009 08:45 AM (qF8q3)
Big Labor is run mostly by lawyers. It's amazing that unions have the same hierarchy as ACORN and similar orgs. All of the people who think unions are "for the working man" have to realize that they're treated the same as (or worse than) indigent people who have never worked a day in their lives.
Even Karl Marx was about the "workers uniting" but what that really amounts to is being the serfs of a bunch of elitists with a desire to run everyone's lives.
Posted by: AmishDude at November 01, 2009 08:45 AM (ItSLQ)
Posted by: Michael in MI at November 01, 2009 08:46 AM (ObTcs)
Posted by: RNCC at November 01, 2009 08:46 AM (9Wv2j)
WTF??? So she was a Democrat all along. Let this be a lesson to to the Republican count chairs who foolishly selected her as the Republican nominee. Excuse me while I will send another contribution to Doug Hoffman right now.
Posted by: scrubjay at November 01, 2009 08:46 AM (r1UkF)
Posted by: Peaches at November 01, 2009 08:47 AM (9Wv2j)
Posted by: Dagny at November 01, 2009 08:47 AM (//9jP)
Posted by: eman at November 01, 2009 08:47 AM (ZzgoC)
Whatever the outcome, it will prove that the Pubbies need to think carefully who they put up for office.
She would have been a poison pill for the party.
Posted by: TexasJew at November 01, 2009 08:48 AM (1doBx)
Posted by: HeatherRadish at November 01, 2009 08:49 AM (OkT2m)
Enough is enough.
Posted by: Michael in MI at November 01, 2009 01:38 PM (ObTcs)
Amen and amen and amen.
Maybe this very public embarrassment will turn some fence-sitters, or at least convince them that their judgment has been wrong about pretty much everything and that they should start listening to the base, who have been right about nearly everything for a good long while, now.
Posted by: progressoverpeace at November 01, 2009 08:50 AM (A46hP)
Posted by: Dagny at November 01, 2009 08:50 AM (//9jP)
Posted by: Michael in MI at November 01, 2009 08:52 AM (ObTcs)
So, when she officially endorses Owens, are we going to get the "The Party left me" line? Wouldn't that be hysterical after all the money and effort they threw at her? Or will she just say that he's really the more "moderate conservative candidate"?
Any other ideas as to what she's going to say?
(Popcorn, anyone? the comedy just keeps coming...)
Posted by: Mouse at November 01, 2009 08:54 AM (GF971)
One thing is for certain - the impact of the NY-23 saga on the fate of the GOP will have far more long-reaching effects than the simple question of who wins on Tuesday. The Republican establishment that at least pretended to speak to all Americans is deeply, deeply wounded, and a wild-eyed, exclusionist, birther religio-beast is taking its place.
Posted by: WalrusRex at November 01, 2009 08:55 AM (EaU28)
Posted by: Jack Bauer's Dad at November 01, 2009 08:57 AM (DVl4L)
My guess would be nothing overt. She will let everyone around her support Owens publicly, but she will keep her options open.
Posted by: kefka at November 01, 2009 08:57 AM (n1uMU)
...she should endorse Owens. Her career as a Republican is over.
You're right, Dagwood.
The politically shrewd thing for Scooz to do is come out with, "I didn't leave the Republican party, the Republican party left me." The Left will take her in and treat her like a hero, using her to sway moderates by telling them 'there is no room in the Republican party for moderates.'
Posted by: Tweet Knows at November 01, 2009 08:58 AM (f8+ox)
Posted by: the real joe at November 01, 2009 08:58 AM (nbxDI)
Posted by: Dave at November 01, 2009 08:59 AM (vD7J6)
so, if she had any GOP or even mildly conservative principles she'd tell em to stick it. The fact she hasn't says it all. A Donk in a potato sack sockpuppet.
Posted by: Frank G at November 01, 2009 08:59 AM (I+To0)
NJs Governors Race: Candidate Plays Loose With Facts? Today at 9:43amDespite what candidate Chris Daggett is claiming, I have never contacted him or his campaign. I have never asked him to drop out of the NJ Governors race. Now, if a politician is going to play loose with facts like this, the electorate needs to know it.
So, to the good people of New Jersey, please know that Daggetts claims are false. Ive never even suggested he should drop out of the race. But, come to think of it
- Sarah Palin
Posted by: ol_dirty_/b/tard at November 01, 2009 09:00 AM (Z0bVg)
Posted by: eman at November 01, 2009 09:02 AM (ZzgoC)
Posted by: Mouse at November 01, 2009 09:02 AM (GF971)
Posted by: Peaches at November 01, 2009 09:02 AM (9Wv2j)
Posted by: hutch1200 at November 01, 2009 09:03 AM (bTl5A)
Posted by: Dave at November 01, 2009 01:59 PM (vD7J6)
There was no primary you dumbass. Scozzafava was picked by party hacks through smokey backroom shenannigans.
Posted by: ol_dirty_/b/tard at November 01, 2009 09:04 AM (Z0bVg)
Posted by: meep at November 01, 2009 09:05 AM (Jw4eT)
Posted by: tdpwells at November 01, 2009 09:06 AM (Ei3oZ)
Glad he's dropped that charade.
I don't blame Scozzafava for trying to run as a Republican. Just wondering why the party was wasting money on her.
Posted by: meep at November 01, 2009 09:08 AM (Jw4eT)
Posted by: Conciouse, but hungover at November 01, 2009 09:09 AM (kn+jW)
Posted by: kefka at November 01, 2009 09:09 AM (n1uMU)
That was a joke post...right?
When you find a conservative Democrat better not bother him and should take a picture. That species became extinct 75 years ago.
Posted by: Vic at November 01, 2009 09:11 AM (CDUiN)
Posted by: RJ at November 01, 2009 09:14 AM (ADbI4)
Newtered Gingrich fuxed any chance he had to ever be relevant again.
For what? A phony Republican who backs CARD CHECK, ABORTION and gay marriage.
Posted by: gus at November 01, 2009 09:14 AM (Vqruj)
Posted by: RJ at November 01, 2009 09:17 AM (ADbI4)
Posted by: MlR at November 01, 2009 09:17 AM (op9m5)
...and apparently now the Democrat congressional candidate...
Posted by: RJ at November 01, 2009 09:20 AM (ADbI4)
Man, this whole episode is so tiring and depressing. The goddamn leftists have infiltrated everywhere, blatantly running on the R ticket knowing there's not a damn thing the GOP can/will do to them. Other than giving them $900k to use against a convervative, of course.
Posted by: Dang Straights at November 01, 2009 09:21 AM (Dh+s2)
Posted by: Editor at November 01, 2009 09:21 AM (YX6i/)
Yep. The media, the universities, the unions, the public schools, the bureaucracy, and now even the Republican Party!
We. Are. Doomed.
Posted by: RJ at November 01, 2009 09:22 AM (ADbI4)
Posted by: RJ at November 01, 2009 09:24 AM (ADbI4)
Posted by: HeatherRadish at November 01, 2009 09:24 AM (OkT2m)
It is unfortunate that the radical right has saw fit to destroy the career of a wonderful GOP canidate for their own selfish, local personal interests.
I fail to see how Mrs. Scuzzyfava is any different from myself.
I hope you will all support me in 2012 when I attempt to take the back down the road of prosperity that GW Bush put the country on and Obama has accelerated.
Check out newt.org for all my latest products and wisdom.
Posted by: Newt-The-PosionousToad at November 01, 2009 09:25 AM (XoUUl)
Posted by: Dave at November 01, 2009 09:25 AM (vD7J6)
Posted by: eman the Moderate at November 01, 2009 09:25 AM (ZzgoC)
Posted by: jjshaka at November 01, 2009 09:26 AM (v7VDa)
The so-called blue dogs are a farce. Anyone who caucuses and votes with the Nancy Pelosi and Dingy Harry are leftists.
Posted by: Tweet Knows at November 01, 2009 09:26 AM (f8+ox)
Posted by: RJ at November 01, 2009 09:27 AM (ADbI4)
Posted by: Richard McEnroe at November 01, 2009 09:30 AM (8iZnv)
You know how they did it? Two things:
1) Demonizing "McCarthyism", the notion of denying someone a job based on their political ideology, and
2) Practicing it in absolutely every single sphere of life and employment themselves
Liberals who are in charge of appointing or hiring in any institution they want to dominate will simply never pick a conservative for anything, regardless of qualifications. Tenure boards, media hiring, whatever, and -especially- across all forms of government bureaucracy - always hire leftists (all the way to communists), always reject conservatives. Through attrition, this will eventually give them a 50.1% majority in whatever insitution, and from there it quickly devolves to 95%+ control.
The only way to fight it is to do it ourselves. Don't hire leftists, for anything, no matter how qualified they are, and -especially- not if you're in the government and you have any sort of hiring power. But, of course, we've bought into the absurd and hyper-hypocritical "McCarthyism is EVIL" meme by the people who mastered it and raised it to an artform while screeching about it as loud as they can.
Kinda like they screeched from the rooftops that Republicans tried to steal the 2000 election when they were stopped from stealing it themselves. Leftists never scream about anything louder than what they are trying to do themselves, and leftists never screamed about anything as loudly or for as long as they have about McCarthy not wanting communists in the pentagon code room.
Qwinn
Posted by: Qwinn at November 01, 2009 09:30 AM (SxA2Q)
That clock started when John McHugh and the local GOP knew that 0bama intended to appoint McHugh to Secretary of the Army. That was, as I keep pointing out on HotAir, back in April or May, if not earlier. At that point, it appeared 0bama's approval would settle into the mid- 50's. The local GOP went with Scozzafava because they banked on 0bama and his policies continuing to be somewhat popular in NY-23 and figured riding the liberal wave was best to win the race.
The late June early-July happened.
The recruitment of candidates for 2010 is happening after July, like the choice for Scozzafava was before July. Unlikely to be any more Scozzafavas in that batch.
Posted by: Sekhmet at November 01, 2009 09:33 AM (t7fcE)
Posted by: Sekhmet at November 01, 2009 09:34 AM (t7fcE)
Posted by: Richard McEnroe at November 01, 2009 09:34 AM (8iZnv)
Posted by: Michael in MI at November 01, 2009 09:37 AM (ObTcs)
Heath Shuler voted against porkulous (good) but he voted for Crap and Tax (very bad). He is anti-abortion and anti-gay marriage.
He hasnt been in congress long enough to amass much of a record but currently, at best, he is mixed on economic issues. Unable to determine other issues because they have not come up.
I would not call anyone who voted for crap and tax a conservative though. He is closer to being a religious liberal like Huck.
Posted by: Vic at November 01, 2009 09:39 AM (CDUiN)
That was the beginning of the end.
Qwinn
Posted by: Qwinn at November 01, 2009 09:40 AM (SxA2Q)
Posted by: Michael in MI at November 01, 2009 09:44 AM (ObTcs)
Posted by: Qwinn at November 01, 2009 09:45 AM (SxA2Q)
Was Sen McCarthy the first test-subject of the Democrats/Leftwing strategy of Politics of Personal Destruction?
Posted by: Tweet Roesgen at November 01, 2009 09:45 AM (f8+ox)
Posted by: Michael in MI at November 01, 2009 09:47 AM (ObTcs)
Was Sen McCarthy the first test-subject of the Democrats/Leftwing strategy of Politics of Personal Destruction?
No. Orwell recognized it as endemic to the movement. He invented the character "Emmanuel Goldstein".
Posted by: AmishDude at November 01, 2009 09:51 AM (ItSLQ)
Posted by: Tweet Roesgen at November 01, 2009 09:54 AM (f8+ox)
Posted by: shoey at November 01, 2009 09:56 AM (n4TZg)
Well, if true (Scozz telling her pals to support Owens) it's a little surprising (but only a little). I would have thought that she would be a little more circumspect about it.
Whether Hoffman wins or loses on the 4th is of less importance than what's happened up to this point. A rino was installed by the county gop executives in a process that seems to be in question (I gather that several were excluded). This causes Hoffman to run as a conservative. The real conservatives in the district began to sit up, take notice and review Scozz's record as well as taking a look at Hoffman. This causes them to begin to switch to Hoffman. The polls begin to reflect this and the media begins to cover it in the hope of seeing a gop meltdown in this district. Newt toddles in and gives his endorsment to the rino on the basis that it's the voters of the district that should choose the candidate not "outsiders" (I'm trying to figure out where all the outsiders were coming from at this point). Hoffman support continues to grow even though Newt is warning about vote splitting and that any win for the gop is good (it seems the more to the left the better for Newt).
Sarah Palin weighs in to support Hoffman with a pretty eloquent note on her facebook page. The polls show that Scozz is becoming a distant 3rd and has no chance of winning. Grass roots gop in the district flock to Hoffman and for the first time the race is a clear choice between a liberal and conservative.
Money flows into Hoffman's campaign (big donations, small donations) from people from all over. Just about all the major gop figures now follow Palin's lead and endorse Hoffman even though he's not running under the gop banner. The gop stops supporting Scozz and stops running the anti Hoffman ads.. After a final devastating poll Scozz suspends her campaign and neglects to endorse Hoffman but rather (it's said) begins to quietly tell her supporters to vote for the Owens.
This is example proves that conservatives (even "moderate" republicans) can effect what goes on in their districts and take back control of the local executives now. You can finally be in a position where a candidate is chosen on the basis of his/her beliefs and not whether it "their turn". They can be chosen because they can be trusted to follow the wishes of the voters and not what the MSM thinks is right.
There has talk of the risks of vote splitting. The fear that if conservatives run independantly then the dems will slip right up the middle. That's a valid concern but NY23 seems to have shown that it's not an automatic effect and that the people can make the difference. Having said that, the time to start the process of getting the best candidates begins now. Conservatives have to get involved now if that means joining the gop then do so. You may not like the in place executive now (both at the national and the local level) but unless you're in the party you don't get a say in making the changes needed. Don't automatically think that even a squishy rino is better then a dem otherwise you'll end up with Olympia Snowe, heck the people in NY23 almost did.
Posted by: scr_north at November 01, 2009 09:58 AM (GE/dx)
Posted by: Mouse at November 01, 2009 10:00 AM (GF971)
Posted by: Countrysquire at November 01, 2009 10:03 AM (hubfJ)
Buy my stuff! Visit my website!
This extremism in our big tent has to stop!
Did I mention I have a wide variety of Official Newt products at my website?
newt.org if I did not mention it.
Posted by: Newt-The-PosionousToad at November 01, 2009 10:07 AM (XoUUl)
openly conservative ppl are shunned and reviled at every opportunity by the Left. Qwinn has it right they've been going "McCarthy" on us for years now.
Rush can't even buy into a football team.
this isn't the United Sates that i grew up in, but we're going back there, even if I and others have to drag the whole lot with us kicking and screaming all the way.
lawyers included.
Posted by: shoey at November 01, 2009 10:07 AM (n4TZg)
I just wanted to stop by & let everyone know that I have decided to endorse Doug Hoffman (hope I got the spelling correct) and hope you will join me in supporting him.
Check out my website for my latest thoughts on how to bring about Contract with America 1.8 and take a look at all my great Newt products.
Posted by: Newt-The-PosionousToad at November 01, 2009 10:10 AM (XoUUl)
NY 23 has never gone dem, if it does, you can thank the onions and BO's operatives who skillfully outsmarted the republicans yet again. And you guys wonder why so many independents are around, cause, in the end, the republicans are just as bad, sometimes worse than the dems. They are all the same, politicians in it for themselves and their cronies.
someone better found a "people's party, and fast, before "the people" lose all their rights completely. Fareed had a program today. Was just listening when I went in and out of the room but I did catch that the chinese consumer is buying like mad, everything they can get their hands on. He said predictions say the average Chinese will be upper middle class in ten to twenty years. Where will the average american be?
Posted by: curious at November 01, 2009 10:12 AM (p302b)
Those are fighting words. I don't know if I'd go that far.
One point I would like to make though is how come the people on the right are always told to suck it up for the good of the party and eat a RINO crap sandwich when those same RINOs did not suck it up and support Palin as VP.
Posted by: Just Another Poster at November 01, 2009 10:17 AM (HAdov)
Posted by: Countrysquire at November 01, 2009 03:03 PM (hubfJ)
He was in a global warming commercial sitting on a couch with Nazi Pelosi. Does it really get much worse?
Posted by: Unclefacts, Meteor Summoner, Lover of Bacons at November 01, 2009 10:25 AM (erIg9)
NO.
Posted by: Unclefacts, Meteor Summoner, Lover of Bacons at November 01, 2009 10:26 AM (erIg9)
NO.
And on the other side, when they say they're compromising to be more conservative to get elected it's with a wink & nod to their extremist base that it's ONLY to get elected, but they'll be radical once their in.
Posted by: Editor at November 01, 2009 10:37 AM (YX6i/)
You mean, like Bush?
Posted by: MlR at November 01, 2009 10:39 AM (op9m5)
Posted by: Michael in MI at November 01, 2009 10:45 AM (ObTcs)
Posted by: Michael in MI at November 01, 2009 10:54 AM (ObTcs)
Posted by: Michael in MI at November 01, 2009 10:56 AM (ObTcs)
Posted by: shoey at November 01, 2009 11:02 AM (n4TZg)
for consistancies sake Newt should endorse Owens as well.
Posted by: shoey at November 01, 2009 11:03 AM (n4TZg)
Posted by: AmishDude at November 01, 2009 11:13 AM (ItSLQ)
Those aren't "fighting words" at all, but simply "what is". Go back and check his post when Sarah Palin resigned. All he said was "she's done".
Yet, here he writes "I feel bad for her (Scozzo)" and does nothing but make excuses and give her the benefit of the doubt. Nothing of the sort was given to Palin.
Ace is done.
Posted by: Cadillac Short at November 01, 2009 11:16 AM (pEv+h)
Posted by: shoey at November 01, 2009 11:25 AM (n4TZg)
Posted by: shoey at November 01, 2009 11:27 AM (n4TZg)
That bothered me as well. But the thing that bothered me the most about NG is when he made some semi-gaffe about Spanish being the "language of poverty" (when he was encouraging recent immigrants to learn English), and then he grovelled and apologized ... in an ad ... IN SPANISH!
That's when I began to worry.
But this whole Scuzzlebutt thing ruined Newt in my eyes.
Posted by: RJ at November 01, 2009 12:25 PM (ADbI4)
You basically pulled a Newt in your "Dede's Farewell" post. Guess what, Ace? You're not a tough guy, you're a moronic pussy. This blog is off my bookmarks (except I may post this in a couple of other threads first).
Loyal Ex-Reader,
Dave
Posted by: Dave G. at November 01, 2009 04:41 PM (hNH5b)
<i>104 Has anyone stopped to think that the Left is trying to take over the Republican Party?
Not only are they running faux "Blue Dogs" to increase their numbers in their own Party to give themselves majorities and thus hold the power positions (Speaker and Majority Leader), but they are also pushing liberals to run in the GOP to make it so that they have a liberal majority.
So when the "Blue Dogs" give them trouble, no worries, they have the liberal Republicans to vote with them and, as an added bonus, they can call that "bi-partisanship". </i>
The democrats in Chicago/Cook County have done this for years (take over positions in the "republican" party). Many areas of Chicago/Cook County have zero Republicans, absolutely none (neighborhoods that are full of high-rise public housing for example). But if you are a democrat and want to become a "republican" from one of those neighborhoods in order to throw a wrench into the Cook County Republican party, it's easy to do and does happen. Do you think the real Republicans want to throw minority 'republicans' out of the party? All the locals on both sides know what's going on, it's more of a hassle than anything else but obviously the current occupants of the White House are familiar with this trickery.
Posted by: Boots at November 01, 2009 05:18 PM (06JTY)
Any voter, especially one that claims to be a Republican, that needs to be advised on who to vote for is an idiot.
Posted by: Blacque Jacques Shellacque at November 01, 2009 08:02 PM (jV9DU)
Posted by: Jon at November 02, 2009 05:34 PM (GXnfD)
ucvhost is a leading web site hosting service provider that is known to provide reliable and affordable hosting packages to customers. cheap hosting company believes in providing absolute and superior control to the customer as well as complete security and flexibility through its many packages. windows vps Moreover, the company provides technical support as well as customer service 24x7, in order to enable its customer price.
Posted by: Mark at May 10, 2010 04:35 AM (6DZhO)
Posted by: herman198 at March 10, 2011 01:16 AM (tnRWG)
Posted by: herman198 at March 14, 2011 09:24 PM (jkYgz)
Posted by: how to transfer songs from ipod to itunes at April 14, 2011 12:40 AM (2JYnr)
Posted by: mercedes benz at May 02, 2011 08:32 AM (8JAkx)
ดูทีวีออนไลน์คําคมภาษาอังกฤษเกมส์ตกปลาเกมส์วางระ เบิด 2เกมทําสปา
Posted by: teenxxx1 at April 14, 2012 01:01 PM (/+id0)
Powered by Minx 1.1.4-pink.
