T1B

Jeb Bush Voted #1


I think it is too hard to compare states, but among his peers he is respected highly and he has done a damn good job in a very difficult state to Govern. I think if his last name wasn't Bush, he would be the runaway choice for the Republican nomination in '08. I doubt he will run though or even try for the VP spot on the '08 ticket.

Yea, Fred Barnes is a real objective source.

BTW: I like what Dins did with his post, so I'm going to expand on this and say that George Pataki was not the complete clusterfuck I expected him to be in 94. Albany is still a corrupt nanny state. But I'll give Pataki limited props for not making it worse.

Cicero wrote:I think if his last name wasn't Bush.....

He wouldn't have the burden of being associated with the most corrupt family in American History.


Our governor rocks. Shows up to work every day...says nothing...does nothing. Earned himself the nickname "Teddy the Spectator."

But, with the election coming this fall, he decided to step up on an issue -- withholding our "kicker checks." The background -- Oregon found a way to deal with budget shortfalls...by overestimating the tax bill and collecting extra...A LOT of extra. Then, it would become next year's "general fund"...but only after they'd come up with the budget and how much to collect, sans the extra.

Was kind of an extension of the "taxation without representation" thing...kinda sorta.


So, the People of Oregon passed a Constitutional Amendment outlawing this standard-practice, an amwendment that essentially reads "any extra funds collected from the taxpayer (in the form of state income tax) must be returned via check at the end of the fiscal year."

Pretty simple, right?

Isn't stopping Teddy the Spectator from trying to steal from the People. And the stupid fucker apparently doesn't realize that this same criminal activity (pretty fucking sure it's a guv's sworn duty to uphold the State Constitution above and beyond all other duties) that got him his job in the first place, since the incumbent was pretty much run out of Salem on a rail (but hey, at least he says he's not running again...insert "rolleyes: here...but it gets better -- he claims that his time will be better spent by taking his act on the road and preaching his views on national health care to the non-Oregonians...since our state system does a WONDERFUL job of taking care of illegals, while taxpaying, long-time residents are routinely told to "fuck off" at the ER desk...so you should listen to this guy, for sure).


At this point in our state's politics, I'm not even sure what the governor actually does. Bitches about Bush a lot...that's always a crowd-pleaser around these parts.

BSmack wrote:Yea, Fred Barnes is a real objective source.

From one of your own:


"The oracle of American politics"
—CNN's Wolf Blitzer

Actually, he has done one admirable thing...

Bush and Co. tried to basically fuck over the NW residents by some bullshit deal that was essentially a plan to make home consumers of electricity pay for big-industries electricity for them(kind of in a roundabout way).


Spectator filed federal court motions that put it at odds with previous federal acts (like salmon recovery), and has essentially tied up the issue in court until this administration is gone, and cooler heads can prevail, and the issue might be settled by people without a personal beef with the U&L(sup entire Bush Cartel...."Little Beruit" says "hello").


So, he has that going for him, in the name of, amongst other thing, "protecting the Columbia Gorge"...the same freaking Gorge he ignored the Constitution on and struck a (unilateral, no-discussed) deal with the Indians to put a casino in a federally-protected Scenic Area...what an amazing example of a dipshit. It's possible(not likely) that the whitest state in the country might elect an African-American governor, just because he's the least idiotic of the bunch.


Yet here in Liberalland, there's still these yayhoos whose entire platform is "let's get the homos!!!!!!" Our state GOP is a comedy troupe disguised as politicians....only slightly more pathetic than the Dems.


GOP primary debate:

"How do we fix the budget shortfalls?"


"By getting rid of them damned homos!!!!!!"


"How do we bridge the gap between the rural regions, and the urban regions to create finacial equality between regions of vastlky different revenues?"


Well, first, we KILL ALL OF THE HOMOS!!!!!"


^^^^Not too much of an exaggeration-btw. Nice idea, but doesn't make for a comprehensive platform.

Geez, Cicero, you give me shit for citing Rolling Stone and RFK, Jr., then you turn around and cite Fred Barnes and The Weekly Standard?

BSmack wrote:BTW: I like what Dins did with his post, so I'm going to expand on this and say that George Pataki was not the complete clusterfuck I expected him to be in 94. Albany is still a corrupt nanny state. But I'll give Pataki limited props for not making it worse.

Coupla thoughts on that one:

1. Procedurally, in an ostensible representative democracy, three men in a room is just about the worst idea anyone ever came up with. In fairness to Pataki, that model predates him. But he's had twelve years to do away with it, and he's failed miserably on that account. Then again, considering that he was Al D'Amato's hand-picked candidate, anyone who took seriously his claim that he was a "reformer" ought to have their head examined.

2. While the state budget has been on time, or reasonably close to timely, the last few years, the record late budgets in state history all occurred under Pataki's watch. If he deserves credit for the recent turnaround, he also deserves blame for the earlier sinking into the abyss.

3. Does anyone else find it ironic when they see Pataki's ugly, constipated-looking mug all over TV pimping legislation that passed only because the legislature overrode his veto (e.g., Child Health Plus, Healthy NY)?

Terry in Crapchester wrote:Coupla thoughts on that one:

1. Procedurally, in an ostensible representative democracy, three men in a room is just about the worst idea anyone ever came up with. In fairness to Pataki, that model predates him. But he's had twelve years to do away with it, and he's failed miserably on that account. Then again, considering that he was Al D'Amato's hand-picked candidate, anyone who took seriously his claim that he was a "reformer" ought to have their head examined.

2. While the state budget has been on time, or reasonably close to timely, the last few years, the record late budgets in state history all occurred under Pataki's watch. If he deserves credit for the recent turnaround, he also deserves blame for the earlier sinking into the abyss.

3. Does anyone else find it ironic when they see Pataki's ugly, constipated-looking mug all over TV pimping legislation that passed only because the legislature overrode his veto (e.g., Child Health Plus, Healthy NY)?

All true. But I don't give Spitzer a chance in hell of changing the "3 men in a room" system. Funny how once one becomes one of the men in the room, the system starts looking better.

And don't be surprised if the new Governor's budgets start getting later and later. Pataki has only started getting budgets in on time since it became obvious he was leaving office at the end of his 3rd term. Between that and the last two years of record gas tax revenue, there's not much for the fat cats in Albany to fight about.

As for the TV ads, they ought to be reported by the state as political donations. Like Pataki really cares if old people sign up for medicare.

Cicero wrote:

BSmack wrote:Yea, Fred Barnes is a real objective source.

From one of your own:


"The oracle of American politics"
—CNN's Wolf Blitzer

Wolf Blitzer is a "lefty"?

Just how sperm-drunk are you this afternoon, Sissy?