Lincoln-Boozman Debates Pose a Health Risk
Fortunately Rep. John Boozman (Corporate Sellout, AR) stopped talking in time to avoid having to rush the man on the right to the hospital.
Here Senator Blanche Lincoln (Corporate Sellout, AR) puts herself to sleep with a rousing speech about farm subsidies.
*****************************************
Here is a FOX News article entitled "You Really Can Be Bored To Death."
I believe that is the threat faced by thousands, perhaps tens of thousands, of Arkansans should John Boozman win the Republican primary and face Senator Blanche Lincoln in the general election! A debate between them would be so awkward, so devoid of eloquence and originality, that if anything on earth really is capable of boring someone to death, a debate between those two should do it.
So obvious is it that they are both painfully boring is that John Brummett and I agree on it, and that does not happen much. Rather than debate for U.S. Senate, they should have a debate for who is the most boring public speaker in America. Each could argue that the other is the most boring, and any audience members who survive the exchange can be the judge.
Only the Republican primary voters of this state can save us from this looming catastrophe!
posted by Mark Moore (Moderator) at Thursday, February 11, 2010
20 Comments:
Do you think either Holt or Baker have a shot against the Congressman?
Baker is going to take this in a walk. B & H have no idea how thier base up there is slipping. And since Baker is quickly becoming the tea party candidate he will be able to galvinize the grass roots efforts.
I would have to agree. Boozman and Holt lack what is needed this year. Each will get creamed by Lincoln in the debates and can't appeal to down state voters. Boozman is so flat and stale. The only reason he is congressman is because Hendren fell apart right before the election. Boozman was just the fall back. And Holt needs a better speech writer.
Either has a shot against Boozman, who has high negatives and far less crossover appeal than either Baker or Holt. JB also gives away too much in issues that could be used against Lincoln by Holt or Baker, like the bailouts.
Baker will NOT take it in a walk however. He may not take it at all. If Holt returns to form the run-off is going to be between Boozman and Holt. I am putting my name on that prediction.
Baker was outpolled by Holt even before Boozman jumped into this, and his main credentials of being the establishment's choice no longer applies. His fundraising is going to plummet. He has to hope that the war chest he built up while the establishment's darling will see him through.
Baker was the insider who was supposed to keep Holt out. He was failing because he had no appeal in primary-vote rich NWA. The only establishment guy who could deny outsider Holt the nomination- and the seat, was John Boozman. But voters are so angry this year that even that extreme move may not be enough- it depends on Holt.
I missed it. Was there a primary poll that included Sen. Holt?
Not that I can tell you about, but I refer to the Mason-Dixon Poll which I discussed Jan. 21st.
I don't quite see how Holt gains that much traction with both Baker and Boozman running. Both Baker and Boozman have organisation that can get out of the third district. And the key to this race will be getting the Little Rock suburbs to vote GOP. I just don't see how Holt can connect with central Arkansas. Sure Holt did well in the Lt. Gov. race. But who really things Banks was that serious of a candidate.
The same establishment people who are on here peddling Baker. They said the exact same things about Banks.
At the time, all of the insiders did. Richard Bearden did. He was "the only one who could win" etc etc....
Of course, they were vocalizing through their anal cavity, as they so often do.
Really. comparing Baker to Banks is a little flattering to Banks. Baker has actually held elected office and won against a very credable democrat. What office did Bank every win? Banks was also their second choice too. Bker is also working harder than Banks and raising more money than Banks did. Banks ran a very poor campaign.
Baker's biggest problem is his campaign rhetoric on fiscal matters is polar opposite of his documented legislative voting record in Little Rock.
The pressure from Lobbyist and Party leadership is not less buy even exponentially more in DC.
If Bert couldn't stand form smaller government and less taxes in Small Rock, he will be a long shot at best to stand in DC.
Baker voter less fiscally conservative than several democrat senators he served with. He was not nor will he ever be a Reagan Conservative.
Here’s is a small sample for all you mushrooms out there who think Baker’s a fiscal conservative:
Holt voted against the bill for $360 million tax increase that resulted in an increase of our sales tax to 6%. Act 59 (SB42) Holt was one of two Republicans voting against this bill and one of eleven senators altogether voting against it. (There were 35 senators and eight of them were Republicans.)
Bert again voted for this Tax Increase!
Holt voted against the facilities bill that allows the State to take over all school facilities in Arkansas. The study on the Facilities issue recommended $4.5 billion to repair schools in Arkansas. The bill gave the State Board of Education the right to prioritize and control ALL improvements, building, and major equipment spending on school buildings IN THE STATE. At the time of this bill less than 10 states in the nation had similar laws on facilities. Holt was one of two Republicans voting against this bill and four senators altogether. Act 90 (HB1009) by Betty Picket.
Bert again voted for more bureaucracy and Bigger Gov’t!
Bert is a Big Gov't Republican despite his continual campaign invocations of Reagan, Promises, Pledges and Blah, blah, blah...ad nauseum.
Holt voted against the Omnibus bill ((a 50 plus page bill) which implemented a state – government controlled curriculum in every school in Arkansas and expanded government control of schools in numerous areas, allowing the state board of education to take over schools even the first year schools did not meet state’s requirements. Only two Republican senators voted against it, and five senators altogether. Act 1467 (HB 2697)
Bert again voted against local control and a bigger state government redundancy department in Small Rock.
Holt voted against the failed SB28, the consolidation and reorganization plan by Senator Argue to consolidate schools under 500, and against Act 60 (HB1109) for consolidating small schools and extending government control and regulation. The state already had about 30 school districts where students were riding the bus 3 1/2 hours a day, and this would have extended these long bus rides to many, many more school districts. Holt was one of two Republican senators voting against the bill. Act 60 (HB 1109).
Bert Again sided with the Big Gov’t State Control of Local Schools on one.
Starting to see a recurring pattern Here.
Holt voted against the $107 million bill for 32 new State Department of Education employees, to give $107 million dollars to Arkansas Department of Education for 32 new employees (growing government). Act 98 (SB91).
Bert also recently voted for a Gas Severance Tax increasing natural gas prices to the consumer right now. And decreasing Exploration Right here in Arkansas(Shrunk the Arkansas Tax bases in this business segment).
Sorry to burst the campaign bubble of misinformation that Richard Bearden, Clint Reed and Bert Baker are trying to create here.
This is the tip of the iceberg on his fiscal voting record of increasing taxes, increasing spending and growing the State Government Beauracracy in Small Rock.
Here is the link to the legislative site where you can find more of the above
http://www.arkleg.state.ar.us/SearchCenter/Pages/historicalbil.aspx
Robert the Bruce
Come on Bake', man up and claim your votes. Quit runnin from it. Admit it or Quit it! That's ridiculus.
You're the last people who should insult Banks, you Baker bums. Banks is an accomplished attorney-- federal prosecutor if I recall correctly. Does anyone even know what tax-raker Baker did before he got into office?
Gilbert Baker's employment history lines up perfectly with 93% of the good folks in Obama Administration.
They all have no private sector or productive sector or military work experience.
Hence, it is not in Bert's Political DNA to say no to growing the size scope and freedom taking power of government.
One only needs to look skin deep at his legislative voting record in Little Rock to confirm that fiscal conservatism past present or future will not be part of his make up.
Sounds harsh, but as Reagan said, facts are stubborn little things.
I don't question the facts of his record but I do question the veracity of his campaign rhetoric.
Ralph
I use Banks because he ran better against Jim than Matayo, who was an elected official and in fact was Huckabee's floor leader in the House.
The situation was the same as in 06, but with more firepower. Two establishment guys, one in NWA to cut into Holt's vote there and another from outside the 3rd district to play the division card that is so often played by the rest of the state GOP against the NW.
You think Boozman's strength is the same as Matayo? I think Holt will do well, but Boozman is much stronger than Huckabee's boy.
You notice that I did say "with more firepower." Holt beat those two easily, winning 55% in a three way race while spending only 17% of the money. I am not predicting that this time. I am predicting that IF Holt returns to his earlier form, he will be in the run-off, and he has a good chance of winning it.
He will have to raise far more money to have 17% of the total money raised, because the money spent in this primary will be much greater, but so far he has been raising more, but still all he needs to be competitive and get in the run-off is raise about that fraction of the total money raised IMHO.
It'll be interesting for sure. Baker gets too worked up staying focused only on Lincoln when he needs to tell us what his agenda is. He has a very bad reputation for his service to Arkansas so far.
He says he'll be better than Lincoln but his voting record sure doesn't look like it. He says "no earmarks" and on and on but he did it himself. I really don't see him making us a good choice to count on.
Holt could get away with only spending 17% of the money. Mainly because the vast majority of votes are from Benton and Washington counties. The others had to spend more to compete in the area.
Holt will need a good size war chest for the general to beat the machine politics of the democrat who emerges from the primary.
Holt is a proven tested "record-having" fiscal conservative who is better than anyone at conserving his campaign $ as well as the $ in the treasury of which he has been charged with preserving while holding public office.
Holt already has the statewide name recognition even surpassing Blanche and the other Republicans in the most recent Mason Dixon Poll.
Additionally he does not have to spend mega bucks on recasting himself as Baker or Blanche or JB will have to do to attempt to convince the conservative, independent and Reagan Democrate voters of Arkansas they are against gov't bailouts, higher taxes, and exponentially bigger government((because Bert, Blanche, & Boozman have do and will vote for such schemes).
Holt can run on his record. It's pretty simple. The others can't, either because they don't have one or because the one they have absolutely stinks.
Bert, Blanche, & Boozman must obfuscate their records to the media and the voters.
Note if you haven't looked at legislative voting records and are only listening to campaign rhetoric, then you are not dealing with a full deck of cards.
When you go to buy a car do you only listen to the car salesman or do you do the hard work and dig deeper?
And which method works out better for you?
We the people have only been listening to the car salesman & have not done the yeoman's work on vetting our employees who we are sending to Small Rock or DC.
This fact is the reason we have, for the most part with few exceptions, the sad sack bunch of Constitution ignoring spineless folks currently in office.
If you choose to not rely on voting records then we will be looking at 1994 all over again. We sent a bunch of new blood to DC who after all is said and done failed in their mission overall and some were easily compromised and obviously not ready for the big time bullets.
They saw the bullets and ran for the hills thinking only about their re-election over and above what they took an oath to doand eventually folded.
And we the taxpayer were left with business as usual in DC, higher taxes, bigger government, and less freedom.
We still have the Dept. of Education, Energy, ad nausem.....
Some of these candidates have not been able to take the Bullets in Small Rock. They have folded and their record reflects said such compromises and fiscal illiteracies.
Robert the Bruce
Post a Comment
<< Home