It is time to take sides: Michele Rollins for Congress–NOT
Jul 8th, 2010 by David Anderson
As you know, I had endorsed my good friend Kevin Wade for the Congressional seat. I waited a while to take sides after the convention to see what Mr. Wade would do. I have chosen sides. There are rumors of my joining the Urquhart team that I will confirm in my time with a proper announcement. I will continue to publish releases from all campaigns as long as they are newsworthy or even just interesting.
I have watched the Rollins campaign with some interest. The candidate is an attractive one (politically speaking, I am not being sexist). She is intelligent, self funding, and well spoken. I found her to be friendly and a decent human being. She understands that America can not keep going down the wrong path. We are in a struggle as she said between free enterprise, and big government statism. If she is the party nominee in September, I will support her.
I can not support her in the primary and I doubt that she will be that nominee. I have written a number of positive posts on Glen Urquhart and will soon write one on explaining my support of him, but today, I will discuss my doubts about Michele Rollins. The job of a Congressperson is to make decisions. It is not to administrate. It is to legislate.
She is the Waffle House candidate from A to Z. She is opposed to abortion, but supports your right to get one and even donated to an organization that supported only candidates who favored abortion rights. She is for cutting the deficit, but she is the bailout queen. She wants to cut the national debt increases, but oppose touching entitlements. She is the attorney in the race, but couldn’t name most of the freedoms protected by the first amendment. She speaks of free enterprise, but made what 9 figures off special monopoly gaming licenses. She is opposed to cap and trade, but hasn’t given a position on energy policy nor rejected the carbon tax which replaces cap and trade. She says marriage is between a man and a woman, but says such issues should be left to individuals. (I have no idea what that means.) She hates the Democratic health care reform and thinks it harms the nation, but she thinks going after a repeal of health care reform is a waste of time, no she says she is open to it– three positions on a single issue. She seemed to favor a National ID and an immigration hardline then she doesn’t. That is not leadership. I would rather have someone who takes a stand and makes a mistake once in a while, than someone who seems be all over the map.
I can not support a candidate who seems to have 5 hands because every issue has about 4 “on the other hands”. Michele Rollins is a wonderful person who has improved the lives of people in this state through charitable giving and helping her late husband’s companies. The question is do we need another person who doesn’t have a firm foundation. We need people ready to fight for America’s ideals. She isn’t ready yet. The battle is raging but she is blowing an uncertain trumpet. I will not follow into battle a leader who has no plan only reactionary tactics.
That is my view. I welcome yours.
Adendum, Rollins website in which she claims the to be able to solve our long term problems without touching entitlements.
Equally frightening is who owns our debt. For years fellow Americans owned our government’s debt through bonds and mutual funds that were safe and protected. Today an ever-increasing amount of our national debt is owned by foreign governments like China, putting the future of the U.S. economy in the hands of foreign governments.
Someone has to go to Washington and say STOP, and that is why I am running for Congress.
Here’s what Congress should do:
1. Freeze all discretionary spending NOW. The current budget before Congress will increase spending in all too many areas, and insure that the $8,000 per family spending increase in the 2009 budget will become permanent.
2. Stay the course. Entitlements like Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid must be left untouched.
3. Pay as you go. No new Federal program or increases – regardless of how worthy they may be—shall be funded without a dollar-for-dollar cut in another part of the budget.
4. No ‘earmarks’ for the individual programs of any member of Congress. We have all read about outrageous “pork” projects slipped into the budget by individual members of Congress, usually at the urging of special interests. Even with efforts to end the worst of these abuses, there are still a staggering 10,000 earmarks in this year’s Federal budget, totaling almost $20 billion. Some of these programs may be good, and some may even help Delaware, but unless the number is zero, there will be no reform. This practice must stop now.
So okay, I’ll step with my opinion.
Which I have one, to everyone’s surprise.
I am really confused by this race. I saw Kevin Wade when he spoke at a Republican meeting here in Sussex and liked him. Thus I thought my decision on that matter was solved.
But like so many good candidates, the GOP didn’t try to groom or promote him. Evidently he couldn’t make the cut.
So we have Rose Izzo and I dunno, she seems like a nice lady and everything but I daresay I’d be a better nobody candidate than Rose Izzo. Not that I have anything against nobody candidates but I at least did sit all day and make calls for Ruth Briggs King, I sat at the Georgetown GOP HQ all day many a day, I sold silent auction tickets….you know, on and on and on. And somewhere I think I’m chair of political campaigns with the Sussex county GOP women’s club. Sussex county’s fear of telling Mike Castle to go somewhere where the sun don’t shine, and that Kate woman’s constant cloudy presence everywhere effectively had me cut off all that sort of thing.
Point being, if I vote for a nobody candidate I want someone who’s been working hard behind the scenes and is ready for that step up and a helping hand from a voter like myself.
So there’s Michelle Rollins and I hear she’s a Castle clone and yet, on paper, she doesn’t sound half bad. And that quote from her web site sounds sorta okay.
I just don’t trust the woman. I don’t think she’s a conservative. I think she’s dancing with words and by me, it ain’t happening.
so there’s the Uquehart guy and don’t even ask me to get the spelling right on that. I hear something about Nazi’s, Vance Phillips is his campaign chair, he used to be Reagan’s Chief of Staff or some such and hey….
I think I’m going to go for the guy with the funny last name. I like that he said that thing about the Nazi’s and pissed off everyone on that lib web site.
I have no problem with him being a developer, no I don’t. In fact, give me someone who grew communities any day over Community Organizers who destroy them. I don’t care about the Nazi quote cause I know a bigger deal was made about it than need be. I’ll even forgive Vance Phillips for running his campaign although hey, Vance, you better keep doing the job I elected you to do or I’m going to be really mad.
All I need is one watermelon from Vance and my vote goes to Urquhart. Is that too much to ask?
The problem with her quote was not that she is right about her diagnosis, but wrong on the solution. No serious person who understands the budget says that we should stay the course on entitlements. You could eliminate all discretionary spending and we would still have a structural long term deficit. Freezing elevated levels and leaving entitlements alone isn’t even sufficient for Obama’s rhetoric. I admit his actions are the exact opposite but at least he understands enough to say differently.
David — I’d like to ask the question directly, since the rumors are running rampant: are you formally involved with the Glen Urquhart campaign? Are you a paid staffer or a volunteer staffer? Please share your level of involvement, because your ethics are exemplary, and I don’t want this rumor running around unsubstantiated. Thanks.
[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by DelawarePolitics.net. DelawarePolitics.net said: It is time to take sides: Michele Rollins for Congress–NOT: As you know, I had endorsed my good friend Kevin Wade … http://bit.ly/avhk3f [...]
No level of government should be involved in any activity that its constitution or charter does not so authorize. Reference, Article 10 of the US Constitution, and apply it everywhere.
If the majority of voters understood and voted this, our country, state, counties, and municipalities would be in much better shape. And, our freedoms would not be in jeopardy.
The answer is that I have choosen sides. I have refused any compensation until we get into the general except limited reimbursements for expenditures. I don’t even take mileage. If people are going to value my opinion, I want them to know it is not bought. It is based solely upon my convictions.
It is the real reason that I no showed my dear friend Maria when I said I was going to cover the Eastern Sussex Republican Women’s event and interview Ms. Rollins. I had just accepted the position. I couldn’t find someone to take my place. I can’t cover a race when I have a dog in it. I still give an open forum and give fair play to people at the events that I happen to attend, but I am defering point to Angel on candidate questions in this race. It is also the point of this two part post. We are not ready for an announcement yet because we are announcing a team, but I wanted the readers to know the facts and the reasons behind my decision.
She is doing a great job and I have full confidence in her.
David – So who is “we”? The campaign or the folks at this blog? See the problem?
As the head honcho here now, everything and anything you and your crew do on this race will automatically be suspect, whether or not you take a hands-off approach.
Even if you don’t take a paycheck now, you do have a clear vested interest in the Urquhart campaign – if he makes it to the general, you get some cash. Even if that’s not your motivation, it would be sufficient motivation to others.
I strongly suggest you take a leave from the blog to focus on the campaign. If not, at the very least, your opponents will be scouring the blog for out-of-context quotes they can pull and attribute to an Urquhart campaign staffer.
As a personal appeal, please take the extra step that you don’t take on this blog and run spellcheck before sending anything out from the campaign. It would be a plus.
Whatever, I don’t take your advise seriously. I pay for this microphone for a reason, to share my beliefs in the path for American renewal. I have thousands of pieces on written postions since 1982. How would taking a leave from the blog serve any purpose? What it would do is weaken the ability of the conservative movement in Delaware to shape the issues. As for spell check, I am not sure who you are talking about, my work speaks for itself. I spell check three times before publication (posts not comments). It is not foolproof, but it works pretty well. Blogs are about speed, news and opinion. They are not books with editors and proofreaders looking at something for 3 months.
The only vested interest that I have is this country. I laugh that you say the fact that I refuse to take money gives me one. To be clear, if we win the primary, I will evaluate then based upon time requirements and the campaign will evaluate based upon need. The team may be so strong that I will not be needed in any full time capacity. I sort of hope not, but I will do what I need to for the team. I already have a job. I am not looking for one. I do not get any bonus or compensation in any way for a victory. So no cash for a primary victory as motivation. Sorry to disappoint you. I have no problem with going full time to defeat Democrats. I just do not know that will happen. I have no particular problem with it or anyone doing so for that matter. If you work 12 hours a day like the full timers, you should be paid. I just made a personal decision that I believe better serves both myself and the campaign. I believe my personal effectiveness would be compromised by taking any compensation in the primary. I am glad that you are so confident in our ability that you already have us winning. My goal is to make you correct. I was truly concerned that the campaign had hit some headwinds. I feel very confident now that Paul has the ability to guide the campaign through to victory with the expanded team. The old team did a fine job. They just needed more help. The candidate is great. The marketing of him should be very good so people get a complete picture.
I want people to know that I truly believe in what I am doing with no strings attached. No motivation other than being a true believer in conservatism. I am my own man controlled by no one. That is a fun place to be. People blast one for taking money, they blast another for not taking money. Wisdom is justified of its children.
Yes, the we is the campaign who else will make a campaign staff announcement?
anon, if this was a blog of paid journalist I might understand your position, but we are doing this blogging as a hobby. If people don’t want to view this blog because the current owner is on the team of one of the candidates that is up to them. We contribute to this blog because we want to, and if people do not like or trust what we post than the free market has spoken, but some exagerated sense of ethical concern or moral outrage is not going to stop us from doing what we want with our free time.
If my writing is suspect because of David’s new position than I’ll bear with it and keep writing. My writing has to stand for itself. I hope people will read it because it is worth reading, not because the agree or dissagree with David. I don’t have it in me to base my writing or not writing on a fear of what others will think. I don’t expect any more of David than I do of myself.
This blog has a long history of taking sides….in everything. I just want DA to be extremely clear and forthcoming so no one loses respect for his work on either end. DA will never be a shill for anyone. He has very strong beliefs that come from a pure place. But when you “cross the streams,” it can go awry real fast.
So the blogger who’s working for Urquhart and gets a paycheck if Urquhart wins the primary wrote a hit piece on Rollins. Color me surprised.
David has taken a side in the primary, hardly a crime and certainly given his long felt views is no surprise who he supports this year.
His post on Rollins was hardly a hit piece but you can bet the Carney campaign has tons of them ready and they will stick like glue.
In 2010 the voters are not simply anti government they are anti incompetent government and are looking for candidates with clear positions, workable solutions and are turned off by establishment figures.
I travel the country and everywhere the principled candidates are the ones people are flocking to in droves.
Mike Protack
Urquhart has already been using the Democrat’s hit pieces against Rollins as part of his campaign and it didn’t sell, he lost every district at the Convention. Not even the Wade voters, who broke for Rollins in the second vote, bought into it.
There is no jab that Carney can take at Rollins that will even come close to being as damaging in a general election as Glen Urquhart’s Nazi video.
David,
Don’t you think the fact that you will apparently start getting paid if Urquhart wins the primary colors everything you’ve been doing? Seems to me that you now have a vested interest in seeing Urquhart win and any claim otherwise that you have come to a principled decision becomes suspect.
While I understand that you may prefer Urquhart’s views to Rollins’ views, the real question that every voter needs to ask is simply this: who can win the general election? It’s no accident that Castle, a moderate Republican, was the only Republican to win statewide in 2008. The Delaware electorate, at this time, simply isn’t conservative enough for someone like Urquhart (putting aside his nazi gaffe, which paints him in a most unflattering light). Rollins can win, Urquhart can’t. We need a Republican majority in Congress. Rollins should be the Republican candidate in the general election.
I do have a problem in this post with the inaccurate characterization of Rollins as the bailout queen. With or without TARP funds she was due to get paid by Wilmington Trust as a director of the Bank. Wilmington Trust was not going to go under in 2008 – 2009. I mentioned to others before that I thought that she is being unfairly targeted in this and that I thought that this tactic would unfairly be used by the Democrats. I really didn’t think that Republicans, who actually know how business and banks operate, would stoop to the level of Democrat smear merchants.
I am not paid. I have no agreement to get paid. What does no compensation mean to you? No salary, no bonus, no victory stipend, no money in anyway, no advertisements, no promises for compensation. Sorry guys but you must think that I am an Americorps volunteer. As Dave B. said, everything that I do is out of conviction. I believe in the right to life and traditional marriage. No money is needed to motivate me to support them. I completely refused any compenstation for my efforts. I must say Paul accepted my refusal with no argument. MMM maybe they are paying me what I am worth–Just kidding
I do not know how many ways I can say that I am not on the payroll. I guess some people just need to find ways to dismiss something they do not understand. I am not motivated by money. Some people are. I have no issue with that. It appears those of us who are not are an enigma to those who are. There has to be money somewhere to motivate him. I have managed campaigns for free, this is nothing. I have been a press secretary for free. Why take money that I rather be used to win? Victory for the conservative movement is my motivation.
All I have said is after the primary we shall see. The campaign has made me no promises and I have not sought any. I don’t even want to discuss it with the campaign let alone anonymous blog commenters. I already have a job. I do not have the tin cup out.
If you want to know why I made the decision, read the post. I would rather sign on to the endorsed candidate if all other factors are equal. Endorsed candidates have an easier path to victory. The problem is that I believe the endorsed candidate will lose some of our best weapons against Carney. The special interest money from his state cronies is off the table. Strong contrasts on spending seem gone. The ability to bring crossover Latinos and Blacks on the marriage issue is muted. She doesn’t even motivate half of the primary voters let alone crossover voters.
It is no question that you are right that the Democrats will keep playing the Nazi quote. I already have a plan to handle it. It is not a big deal. The economy is. If Carney focuses on a side show like that, he will be creamed just like in the primary when he played gotcha with the breast cancer issue with Markell. If Sharon Angle can still lead in the polls when she is complaining about quotes used from her own website in an ad, don’t tell me that 19% of Delawareans who would never vote for him anyway will sway the election.
TW it polls well. I promise you it will be used. Frankly, I do not believe it is unfair. The entire management received 31 million in additional compensation which The bank would have likely rolled back according to information that I received if it did not get federal money to stablize the balance sheets due to the falling value of the assets. They did not use tax money to do it. Our money just protected them from having to use their money. It is a shell game. That is how business works. Do I have to like it? The issue is not her little bit of money. Let the Democrats worry about that. The issue is does she support the bailouts?
She was trying to defend it again today in the Wall Street Journal. She has been trying to defend against it since March. The Hill covered it, the News Journal covered it. It keeps emerging. Republican Voters have to know that issue is really a drag and need to take it into their calculus. It has a lot more traction than the church state issue which at least pulls socially conservative Democrats. It will cost her at least 10 points in the general with no offset.
Socially conservative Democrats sell out faster than bloggers. Does the name Stupak ring a bell?
Taking sides doesn’t mean one automatically loses his/her integrity. It doesn’t mean a person becomes so sold out he/she can no longer evaluate matters fairly. It simply means one has made a decision to support a person who has similar core convictions.
There’s no such thing as neutrality in politics (or anything else, for that matter). Certainly “neutrality” won’t be achieved by withdrawal from the arena of discussion into silence. Such a retreat would merely mean the other side gets all the say.
It is so surprising that I am supporting my announced second choice. When I gave my endorsement in May, I said my second choice was Glen Urquhart. I guess the only thing surpising is that it took me so long. I wanted to watch. Nothing has changed. My values certainly have not. Second choices have worked out pretty well for me. I married my second choice, my first out of no where fell in love and never even gave a dear John letter, she even invited me to the wedding. The second choice turned out to be far better than I could have hoped, 13 years this month. My choice in houses had a bad title and the contract had to be cancelled. The second was more affordable and has been my home for almost 13 years. I could go on. Second choices have worked out very well for me. The GOP was my second choice of a poltical party. 29 years and counting.
David, anyone who knows you also knows your values don’t change. You have integrity.
David A…
let meknow if you ever want to run for an office,
I’d not only vote for you, I’ll work like the dickens on your campaign.
Wow…liberals and progressive Republicans have lost faith in DA…news at 1AM when no one cares…JUST LIKE NOW….You’re more than welcome to go back to living in Delaware Tomorrow and Delaware Liberal with the rest of your friends.
It’s about time we ALL took a stand and made our opinions known. I mean if journalists (or bloggers who are not paid to write impartial articles) were not supposed to take sides, I expect that the News Journal would have some openings (namely Ginger Gibson for one) for political reporters. I almost forgot though, as long as it’s taking Castle’s side..(or insert liberal/progressive hack here) it’s ok.
In fairness, whether you’re paid or not, just being “on the team” clouds every post you make on the subject – past, present and future. Just so you understand that. I’ve experienced it first-hand.
I agree. The fact is that makes little sense, but it is real to some people. It should be disclosed and people will make their own judgement. I have always been an activist. I will always be one. You will know where I stand straight up. Like Evan said, it is not really surprising. It would have been surprising if I went the other way.
The fact is that most people read because we bring an activist flare and experience. We have not hidden our support for candidates. Frank is a blogger for O’Donnell. Everyone has a candidate that they like. What actually makes us unique is that we go out of the way to include other points of view. Any candidate with a newsworthy release gets posted whether we agree with them or not. We don’t even agree with each other all of the time.
Dave Burris #24 is correct. I am fully aware of that fact, and I believe David is as well. Thanks for the nugget of wisdom and sharing it so concisely. I recall seeing just a taste of what you are talking about in past elections, and while I don’t look forward to being on the receiving end, I do understand the reality of public perception. I won’t be joining any of the political teams this year, but I do accept that because I am contributing to David’s blog my posts will bennefit and be hurt by his reputation and connections as well as my own.
I hope things don’t change too much around here though. After all this blog was under attack by progressives, and some moderates, well before David joined any political team. I do expect an uptick, which is normal for an election year. I just hope it isn’t too big.
David,
You are just a schill for Urqhart. Everything you say will now be suspect.
Dave, here’s what you wrote: “I have refused any compensation until we get into the general [election] except limited reimbursements for expenditures”
So, you’re not getting paid now, but if Urquhart gets to the general [election] you will accept compensation.
How else can that be read?
So, I stand by my observation. Of course, Dave Burris puts it even better when he observes that if you’re on the Urquhart team it colors your posts anyway.
Suspect for what?
As I often said, I have never been a big one into worrying about people’s opinion. I do what is right and let it take care of itself. I explained my reasons on both sides the positive and negative. You know were I stand and why. You will agree or disagree. I am fine with that. Dave knows what he is talking about being a key member of the Romney team and Joanne’s manager as well. I have been through it as well. People who have an ax to grind against a candidate often attack visible supporters. That is sad, but it is American Politics.
Suspect for the post against Michelle Rollins. What else were you going to say since you are in the Urquhart camp? It colors your posts.
Stossel Fan the way to read it is that I get nothing but the satisifaction of advancing my convictions. I have no idea what the general election holds and neither does anyone else. I will do what best advances those convictions when that time comes.
Does it color my posts? Yes, that is exactly why I disclosed it when I made my post. It does not really change anything except that I will tend to sanitize something that the campaign would not want to be stuck with or evaluate it for inside knowledge. I have been questioning since the Wish List and would remain so. What it does bring is an insight into a campaign that you rarely got to see before the blog world. Once in a while you will get glimpes into the thinking behind moves that you saw in public just by the very nature of things. Obviously, you will not get inside information on a public blog. You will get releases and ads as soon as they are public. I guess not much changes there, you did before.
I figure my colleagues will speak their minds. I will speak mine as always about the issues of the day. Will I advocate for my candidate? Yes. Will I turn everything over to being an operation of the campaign, no. I will focus on the issues of the day as always. Understanding the times and the solutions that conservatives bring is my nitch not being a one candidate show. If you want a particular candidate all the time, go to their website not here.
If I put an ad link up for the campaign, it will not be paid for by the way. If you see a Rollins link (fat chance), know that it is paid for.
It is actually the other way around Cookie. I joined the Urquhart team because I am satisfied with him and dissatisfied with her. I have no motivation to be dissatisfied with her because I joined his team. I joined his team becasue I think he is the better candidate. His issues are better. He is better prepared. He is a better match ideologically for me. 3 months is enough time to evaluate them. He holds up better overtime. Both have improved, but his arc is much better and he hasn’t had to change his views. That is big with me.
I just explained my reasoning to all who care to read it. It is not a hit piece. As some of the commenters said, you could see a lot worse. I praise her as a person and having a fundamental understanding that makes her better than the Democrats. Free enterprise v. Big Government. Hit pieces tend not to show strengths and weaknesses.
You people are a piece of work. The hypocracy of those accusing David of being tainted is without compare, they are some who, have in the past made no attempt to hide their bias. So now they come here where we all know that they are schilling for the GOP endorsed candidates(to bolster their standing in the party, no conflict there). I personally prefer honest opinion, over outlets that cloak their bias in “Fair and Balanced” coverage. When you know from the start where the opinion is coming from you have the ability to weigh that opinion. I make no bones about my support of Christine O’Donnell, does that effect how readers view everything else written on this blog, hardly. Would my being paid for those opinions change my opinions? Hardly!Nor do I think that David’s would be changed by a pay check. Those who make that accusation may be saying more about themselves than David.
Our nation has a long history of candidates actually running newspapers. In our earliest history every candidate and even presidents had papers that were clearly in their camp. It was a way for them to get out their views to the people. Blogs are now serving the same service.
It was only when newspapers became big business that they attempted to raise themselves above the politics, to reach a larger buying public.
For those who have questioned David’s integrity, first look in the mirror, then ask yourself, are you upset with the fact that David is working openly for Glen Urquhart, or are you upset that his post nailed Michele Rollins for the Castle clone that she is.
“Castle clone” again, Frank? You didn’t prove that in the other thread, and this thread doesn’t prove it either.
Frank, they are upset that the little boy just pointed out that the emperor has no clothes. They are even more upset that they can’t say that I am paid off. As I said, they blasted Vance for being paid and now they are upset with me for not accepting pay, advertisement money, or bonuses. It is comical. It is not that I couldn’t use some money like most everyone else in this economy. It is that I want nothing to overshadow this move.
It is fun being a free man. That used to be what America was about. (No you libs can’t call me a boy or I will file a humiliation complaint with the Human Relations Commission and get $1500.–If you don’t get the joke, Read the newsstory on the Capitol Theater the DHRC had awarded people $1500 for the humiliation of being subjected to an annoucement to stay in your seats and turn your cell phones on vibrate before a Tyler Perry movie. The manager obviously made the announcement because they were minorities. Superior Court overturned the ruling.)
Its the economy stupid, to borrow from the ragin cajun and the Nazi comment pales to insignificance when you talk about unemployment, mortgages and pensions. The GOP candidate had better be able to rally a positive message to get the country back on track. The only people who will spend more than two seconds on the separation of church comment were never going to vote for Glen anyway.
Spending, debt and entitlements are all prime issues at the national level. I for one don’t mind helping the helpless but I am tired of spending money on the clueless.
Glen has a great personal story of individual success on his own and has a great opportunity to draw in working class, patriotic, gun rights Democrats and Independents. The hard left are stooges for a lost cause of utopia paid for by bigger government which sucks the life out of all us.
A free dinner to anyone who can point out the last endorsed candidate who won statewide who was not an incumbent. It has been almost 20 years!
Mike Protack
Some here seem automatically to equate advocacy with corruption.
Dave B, to use the term “cloud,” for instance, is to suggest deliberate opacity–and possibly even duplicity–is behind every utterance Dave A makes from now on.
Not fair.
Sorry, but what bothers me is that you’ve been on the Urquhart campaign team for a while, sung his praises, bashed Rollins and issued no statement that you were on Urquhart’s team. Frank has always admitted that he was on O’Donnell’s team from his very 1st post.
Donna Lee Williams and M. Jane Brady which proves your point. It has been well over a decade and a half.
Really when did I join? Last of June. I was asked to hold an announcement for a short time. I let the blog team know first. I hadn’t done a post on Urquhart in that time besides publish a release. I do think he did well at events. It became relevant because it was time to speak out. Not to mention the appearing with him at half a dozen events in a week and a half with buttons or the t-shirt on the 4th may have been a clue. The fact that I was expressing support for him and discontent with her may have led to the phone call not the other way around. My criticism of her ceased until then. I still haven’t made an announcement so stay tuned. I could be janitor for all you guys know. I am truly excited about the Glen’s team. We will have to highlight them some time.
Let’s see, two stories by you “Goodbye General Assembly” and “Their Scorn is his Badge of Honor” and you don’t issue a disclaimer that you are on his campaign team. The question is would you have ever admitted it had I not asked you the question which took you forever to admit to? How long were you going to be his schill?
Dave Burris was, ahem, the head of the Sussex county GOP oncit. Dave Anderson never held such a position.
There’s a lot of difference. There shouldn’t be but I think folks saw Dave B under a different light because of it. And I think it’s why Dave Burris is so sensitive to the matter, unrealistically so.
BTW, Dave B, you once told me we’d only have to tolerate Mike Castle for one more election cycle…two years …tops. That was in 2006.
I used to admire you. Let me know when you finally stop shilling for the man so I can admire you again.
Dave A…..stop answering these fools, especially this cookie shill. She’s obviously going to keep baiting you.
You did nothing wrong. At times you presented many points of view to my great annoyance.
Children. They are children.
Like all libs.
Their scorn was a press release that Vance wrote. Am I on Rose’s team too because I publish 90% of her releases. I did leave off one which said simply that the News Journal did not publish her complete questionaire because they did not provide me back up information. I wanted the complete answers to publish. They just wanted me to publish the release which had no news value by itself.
Goodbye General Assembly is a better example. Mr. Urquhart was cast a star of the show. If you want to complain about that one, I can understand it, I don’t agree. It was just reporting an event. My take was confirmed by three newspapers and I blockquoted one of them. He was the one who picked up volunteers from the event.
The Urquhart team would have more right to complain though because Rollins got more praise from me than she did in the newspaper. I thought she gave a good speech there. The papers didn’t cover it because she said nothing new. I covered it because it was good. I have no fear of her catching fire over him with the tea party movement. He is the real deal not a “guest of the tea party movement”.
“A free dinner to anyone who can point out the last endorsed candidate who won statewide who was not an incumbent. It has been almost 20 years!”
When was the last time an endorsed candidate lost the primary?
I am sorry Pat, but you are right, I do present many points of view. I will stop annoying you by answering this and focus on the important stuff. I did think people raised a legitimate question. I fear ignoring them will allow people to fill in the gaps by imagining the answers. They will create their own narrative and it will become reality unless you answer it right away. One of my political dictims is honor undefended is honor presumed not to exist (the late Tony Snow). 80% of the people will what’s the big deal he told you where he was coming from before he even said anything. 5% will say I knew it that conservative schill exposed himself–he was really only pretending to be a Wade person so he could spring Urquhart on us or Urquhart paid him off like “everyone else”. Naturally Mike Castle having a paid staff is patriotic. Michele Rollins doing so is smart. Urquhart is buying people off.
That is why I was ready to answer them so they would not contaminate the other 15%. After today the issue is closed from my perspective, but even the cynics deserve respect. They read and contribute to the success of this blog as well. Give and take. It makes it interesting.
Another free dinner. The late Phil Cloutier.
“Do I have to like it? The issue is not her little bit of money. Let the Democrats worry about that. The issue is does she support the bailouts?”
David, Which bill of the myriad pieces of legislation do you consider the “bailouts” I have seen the smear cartoon some have attributed to the Urquhart campaign that attacks Rollins for her position at Wilmington Trust. (It caime out before the convention and uses your term Bailout Queen) Any intelligent critique of these policies should address the individual pieces of legislation and not conflate them all together in an effort to condemn one person.
Michelle Rollins was on the board of Wilmington Trust when it received TARP money. This was a piece of Legislation passed during the Bush administration that was sold on the basis of saving the world from imminent financial collapse.
The auto bailout, the bailouts in the so called stimulus bills etc. are different animals and were part of the Obama policies.
Now I expect liberals not to be able to make those distinctions but I assume people here do and that you do.
I believe that TARP itself is defensible. No one knows for sure if it saved the financial world but I know some very wise financial people, who I trust, who believe this is so.
I agree that it’s defensible. Let us have that debate. Let’s choose. Does the Republican voter favor the bailout fever.
rationalizethis, in your opinion I haven’t proved it. But I think David did quite well at showing how the two are very similar. You could swap Rollins for Castle in his post and it would fit pretty good. Only the blind refuse to see.
And did cookie actually defend me, I must be dreaming!
Frank is trying to get me in trouble. LOL I won’t bite.
“Dave B, to use the term “cloud,” for instance, is to suggest deliberate opacity–and possibly even duplicity–is behind every utterance Dave A makes from now on.”
Neither I, nor you, nor David gets to choose the perception of the people who come here. You know that. And being a member of a campaign team does cloud the impression of anyone who reads DA’s post. That is a fact of life.
“I used to admire you. Let me know when you finally stop shilling for the man so I can admire you again.”
Pat, the next time I care about your opinion will be the first time. Have a great day.
This whole idea that David being on the team and whether he is paid or not is a smoke screen. The Urquhart campaign didn’t ask David to join the team to “CHANGE” his views, they asked him to join the team because of his views, because they are shared views between the campaign and David. The same goes for being paid. They wouldn’t be paying him to change his views, they would be paying him for his work promoting those shared views as compensation for his time.
How does it differ from when we have party chairs blogging for this or that candiate? Instead of expecting money, the hope is for advancement within the party. Many times this form of patronage is much more intoxicating than money. And has a far more corrupting effect!
“How does it differ from when we have party chairs blogging for this or that candiate?”
It’s not different. Party officials are often seen as pushing for the party’s candidates, which clouds people’s opinions of their posts, too. It’s all about perception.
If you don’t see how this colors peoples’ perceptions of what you’re going to write from here on out, you’re incredibly politically tone-deaf. But it seems like Urquhart is, too, so you should make a good match.
A lot of this depends on what role you’re going to play. If you’re simply a volunteer handing out flyers, that’s one thing. But if you’re, say, the communications coordinator or spokesperson, that’s entirely another.
I hope you develop a thicker skin than you’ve displayed here.
“I agree that it’s defensible. Let us have that debate. Let’s choose. Does the Republican voter favor the bailout fever.”
I am ready for that debate although again TARP was never sold as help to individual companies. Any intelligent discussion of TARP takes into account the situation in 2008 and not the subsequent abuses of the Obama Adminsistration. In fact it is my view TARP should be separated from the Obama bailout abuses. The public needs to be informed in order to make intelligent future choices. So far all I see is demogoguery.
In fairness, whether you’re paid or not, just being “on the team” clouds every post you make on the subject – past, present and future.
Who cares? This isn’t the front page of the New York Times.
So I guess if David starts getting paid by the Urquhart campaign we can expect that he will start promoting smaller government, lower taxes, right to life issues, secure borders,oh wait a minute he has been doing that for as long as I have known him. So what is it exactly that will change folks? Perception? Perception is often more about the one doing the perceiving.
LOL, It would be cool to get paid for what I have done since 5th grade. Of course, I am not so it is moot point. Frank, Faye, and Tim are right. I am a hopeless true believer.
Rick is of course correct, but I would like to point out that we never make up stories here or leak national security secrets so we will never get to the level of the New York Times no matter how much we slip. Sorry I couldn’t resist.