Permalink :: There's more... (85 comments)
KY-Sen: Look who's sneaking up on McConnell
by kos
Sun Oct 19, 2008 at 01:03:32 PM PDT
Research 2000 for Daily Kos. 10/15-16. Likely voters. MoE 4% (9/15-17 results)
McConnell (R) 46 (50)
Lunsford (D) 42 (37)
Stunning. That's a 9-point swing in a month, with McConnell now falling well below the magical 50 percent mark.
Lunsford's gains come among Democrats (12-point gain) and independents (10-point gain). 12 percent of Democrats remain undecided, which isn't surprising given that 1) it's a southern state with a significant number of Dixiecrats, and 2) Lunsford has been a historically terrible Democrat. He seems to have learned from his mistakes, however, bending over backwards to try and reassure skittish Democratic constituencies.
Also note the large number of undecided African Americans -- still more evidence of the "reverse Bradley" effect we're seeing in Southern states. In short, black respondents seem skittish about telling pollsters their electoral choices. We can safely assume they'll slot in with the Democratic ticket at an over-90 percent rate. In this case, that could mean an extra two points for Lunsford.
This one is going down to the wire, guys. And if you want to talk about crushing the GOP, eliminating their highest-ranking leader, and perhaps the only one left who can hold their coalition together, would be a stunner -- a true leadership decapitation.
In the presidential, it's McCain 53-39, a slight improvement from last month's 55-37. Bush won the state 60-40 in 2004, so at worse, Obama seems to be performing at John Kerry-levels.
On the web:
Bruce Lunsford for Senate
Permalink :: There's more... (131
Thursday, October 30, 2008
Monday, October 27, 2008
Questions about McConnell service record.
Questions About Senator Mitch McConnell’s Military Service!
Jim Pence October 27th, 2008
December, 2007 we submitted a request for the Selective Service Classification Records for Senator Saxby Chambliss, Rep Tom Tancredo and Senator Mitch McConnell. When we received the Selective Service Classification Records from the Selective Service System all of the records were included with the exception of Senator Mitch McConnell’s and his was an extract put together by Richard Flahavan, Associate Director for Intergovernmental Affairs. When Richard Flahavan was questioned about sending us an extract of Senator Mitch McConnell’s Selective Service Classification Record, he responded in writing that " Selective Service no longer has access to Selective Service records for men born prior to 1960." Knowing that we had already received the full Selective Service Classification Records for Senator Saxby Chambliss, Rep Tom Tancredo born in 1943 and 1945 respectively we felt that Richard Flahavan was possibly covering for Senator Mitch McConnell. In Richard Flahavan’s extract he writes "the U.S. Army ordered him to undergo an Armed Forces Physical Examination which he did July 9, 1967. Apparently, he did not pass because he was released from the U.S. Army Reserve August 15, 1967." I just love that word apparently!
Several correspondences later we decided to request the information we needed from the National Archives Southeast Region in Atlanta and they sent us Mitch McConnell’s complete Selective Service Classification Records and when we looked under column 7 Armed Forces Physical Examination it was blank , indicating that Mitch McConnell did not receive a Armed Forces Physical Examination as stated by Richard Flahavan, in his extract. If the Selective Service Classification Record is correct and Mitch McConnell didn’t receive Armed Forces Physical Examination, then how could he flunk the Armed Forces Physical Examination he didn’t take and what is the real reason Mitch McConnell didn’t serve his country during the Vietnam war?
Senator Mitch McConnell has an obligation to clear this up and I’m suggesting he publish his military discharge papers for all of us to see and until that time we have good reason to believe he has something to hide.
Jim Pence October 27th, 2008
December, 2007 we submitted a request for the Selective Service Classification Records for Senator Saxby Chambliss, Rep Tom Tancredo and Senator Mitch McConnell. When we received the Selective Service Classification Records from the Selective Service System all of the records were included with the exception of Senator Mitch McConnell’s and his was an extract put together by Richard Flahavan, Associate Director for Intergovernmental Affairs. When Richard Flahavan was questioned about sending us an extract of Senator Mitch McConnell’s Selective Service Classification Record, he responded in writing that " Selective Service no longer has access to Selective Service records for men born prior to 1960." Knowing that we had already received the full Selective Service Classification Records for Senator Saxby Chambliss, Rep Tom Tancredo born in 1943 and 1945 respectively we felt that Richard Flahavan was possibly covering for Senator Mitch McConnell. In Richard Flahavan’s extract he writes "the U.S. Army ordered him to undergo an Armed Forces Physical Examination which he did July 9, 1967. Apparently, he did not pass because he was released from the U.S. Army Reserve August 15, 1967." I just love that word apparently!
Several correspondences later we decided to request the information we needed from the National Archives Southeast Region in Atlanta and they sent us Mitch McConnell’s complete Selective Service Classification Records and when we looked under column 7 Armed Forces Physical Examination it was blank , indicating that Mitch McConnell did not receive a Armed Forces Physical Examination as stated by Richard Flahavan, in his extract. If the Selective Service Classification Record is correct and Mitch McConnell didn’t receive Armed Forces Physical Examination, then how could he flunk the Armed Forces Physical Examination he didn’t take and what is the real reason Mitch McConnell didn’t serve his country during the Vietnam war?
Senator Mitch McConnell has an obligation to clear this up and I’m suggesting he publish his military discharge papers for all of us to see and until that time we have good reason to believe he has something to hide.
Saturday, October 25, 2008
Louisville Courier-Journal endorses Lunsford.
The Louisville Courier-Journal Endorses Bruce Lunsford
Jim Pence October 20th, 2008
Kentucky’s largest newspaper. The Louisville Courier-Journal endorses Bruce Lunsford and to make matters worse for Mitch Republican Billy Harper also endorses Bruce Lunsford.
Jim Pence October 20th, 2008
Kentucky’s largest newspaper. The Louisville Courier-Journal endorses Bruce Lunsford and to make matters worse for Mitch Republican Billy Harper also endorses Bruce Lunsford.
From Daniel S.
Mitch McConnell hates college students
In the inbox and from the College Dems of America:
Mitch McConnell: A History of Voting Against Students
New Poll Demonstrates Strong Youth Support for Bruce Lunsford
Washington, DC – A new poll released today by Research 2000 found overwhelming youth support for Democratic Senate Candidate Bruce Lunsford. The poll, conducted from October 19 – 21, found that Lunsford garnered 50 percent of voters aged 18 to 29, compared to just 41 percent for McConnell. These results are not surprising when considering Senator Mitch McConnell's long record of putting politics and big business before Kentucky's young people. [Research 2000, 10/23/08]
Just last year, Senator McConnell stood with only eleven other Senators to vote against the College Cost Reduction and Access Act of 2007. With the cost of attending college skyrocketing and family income levels remaining stagnant, the bill increased the amount of money available for student aid by roughly $18 billion over the next 5 years – the largest increase in student aid since the passage of the GI bill after World War II. [HR 2669, Vote 326, 9/7/07; House Committee on Education and Labor, September, 2007]
Unfortunately, his vote on the College Cost Reduction and Access Act of 2007 is only emblematic of the Senator's disappointing record with regard to college students. In 2005, Senator McConnell cast a deciding vote for the largest student loan cut in history. The bill was approved by a 50-50 vote with the Vice President casting the tie-breaking vote. [S. 1932, Vote 363, 12/21/05]
Senator McConnell has a long record of opposition to the Pell Grant – he voted five times between 2004 and 2007 against raising the Pell Grant. [S.Amdt. 3028 to S.Con.Res. 83, Vote 39, 3/14/06; S.Amdt. 2213 to H.R. 3010, Vote 268, 10/25/05; S.Amdt. 177 to S.Con.Res. 18, Vote 68, 3/17/05; S.Amdt. 2725 to S.Con.Res. 95, Vote 51, 3/11/04]
In Contrast, Bruce Lunsford will help Kentucky students excel by expanding the tuition tax credit, increasing the funding for the Pell Grant, and streamlining the application for financial aid.
"Time and again Senator McConnell has voted against the youth of our state," said Emily Sullivan, Co-Chair of the Kentucky College Democrats. "It's time we elect a Senator who will address the inaccessibility of college to otherwise qualified students. Young people know that Bruce Lunsford will bring Kentucky's students the change they need."
Moreover as the Republican leader in the Senate, Mitch McConnell has spearheaded the economic policies of deregulation on Wall Street that led directly to the current financial crisis and made it harder for Kentucky's students to secure college loans given the frozen credit market.
"We need a Senator who will put an end to the Bush-McConnell policies that have jeopardized the ability of Kentucky youth to pursue higher education," added Sullivan. "Bruce Lunsford will restore much needed fiscal responsibility to Washington – as Senator, he'll put the priorities of Main Street before those on Wall Street."
The College Democrats of America is the official youth outreach arm of the Democratic Party.
Posted by Daniel S. at 10:06 PM Comment (0) | Trackback (0)
In the inbox and from the College Dems of America:
Mitch McConnell: A History of Voting Against Students
New Poll Demonstrates Strong Youth Support for Bruce Lunsford
Washington, DC – A new poll released today by Research 2000 found overwhelming youth support for Democratic Senate Candidate Bruce Lunsford. The poll, conducted from October 19 – 21, found that Lunsford garnered 50 percent of voters aged 18 to 29, compared to just 41 percent for McConnell. These results are not surprising when considering Senator Mitch McConnell's long record of putting politics and big business before Kentucky's young people. [Research 2000, 10/23/08]
Just last year, Senator McConnell stood with only eleven other Senators to vote against the College Cost Reduction and Access Act of 2007. With the cost of attending college skyrocketing and family income levels remaining stagnant, the bill increased the amount of money available for student aid by roughly $18 billion over the next 5 years – the largest increase in student aid since the passage of the GI bill after World War II. [HR 2669, Vote 326, 9/7/07; House Committee on Education and Labor, September, 2007]
Unfortunately, his vote on the College Cost Reduction and Access Act of 2007 is only emblematic of the Senator's disappointing record with regard to college students. In 2005, Senator McConnell cast a deciding vote for the largest student loan cut in history. The bill was approved by a 50-50 vote with the Vice President casting the tie-breaking vote. [S. 1932, Vote 363, 12/21/05]
Senator McConnell has a long record of opposition to the Pell Grant – he voted five times between 2004 and 2007 against raising the Pell Grant. [S.Amdt. 3028 to S.Con.Res. 83, Vote 39, 3/14/06; S.Amdt. 2213 to H.R. 3010, Vote 268, 10/25/05; S.Amdt. 177 to S.Con.Res. 18, Vote 68, 3/17/05; S.Amdt. 2725 to S.Con.Res. 95, Vote 51, 3/11/04]
In Contrast, Bruce Lunsford will help Kentucky students excel by expanding the tuition tax credit, increasing the funding for the Pell Grant, and streamlining the application for financial aid.
"Time and again Senator McConnell has voted against the youth of our state," said Emily Sullivan, Co-Chair of the Kentucky College Democrats. "It's time we elect a Senator who will address the inaccessibility of college to otherwise qualified students. Young people know that Bruce Lunsford will bring Kentucky's students the change they need."
Moreover as the Republican leader in the Senate, Mitch McConnell has spearheaded the economic policies of deregulation on Wall Street that led directly to the current financial crisis and made it harder for Kentucky's students to secure college loans given the frozen credit market.
"We need a Senator who will put an end to the Bush-McConnell policies that have jeopardized the ability of Kentucky youth to pursue higher education," added Sullivan. "Bruce Lunsford will restore much needed fiscal responsibility to Washington – as Senator, he'll put the priorities of Main Street before those on Wall Street."
The College Democrats of America is the official youth outreach arm of the Democratic Party.
Posted by Daniel S. at 10:06 PM Comment (0) | Trackback (0)
Daily Kos Poll.
KY-Sen: Look who's sneaking up on McConnell
by kos
Sun Oct 19, 2008 at 01:03:32 PM PDT
Research 2000 for Daily Kos. 10/15-16. Likely voters. MoE 4% (9/15-17 results)
McConnell (R) 46 (50)
Lunsford (D) 42 (37)
Stunning. That's a 9-point swing in a month, with McConnell now falling well below the magical 50 percent mark.
Lunsford's gains come among Democrats (12-point gain) and independents (10-point gain). 12 percent of Democrats remain undecided, which isn't surprising given that 1) it's a southern state with a significant number of Dixiecrats, and 2) Lunsford has been a historically terrible Democrat. He seems to have learned from his mistakes, however, bending over backwards to try and reassure skittish Democratic constituencies.
Also note the large number of undecided African Americans -- still more evidence of the "reverse Bradley" effect we're seeing in Southern states. In short, black respondents seem skittish about telling pollsters their electoral choices. We can safely assume they'll slot in with the Democratic ticket at an over-90 percent rate. In this case, that could mean an extra two points for Lunsford.
This one is going down to the wire, guys. And if you want to talk about crushing the GOP, eliminating their highest-ranking leader, and perhaps the only one left who can hold their coalition together, would be a stunner -- a true leadership decapitation.
In the presidential, it's McCain 53-39, a slight improvement from last month's 55-37. Bush won the state 60-40 in 2004, so at worse, Obama seems to be performing at John Kerry-levels.
On the web:
Bruce Lunsford for Senate
by kos
Sun Oct 19, 2008 at 01:03:32 PM PDT
Research 2000 for Daily Kos. 10/15-16. Likely voters. MoE 4% (9/15-17 results)
McConnell (R) 46 (50)
Lunsford (D) 42 (37)
Stunning. That's a 9-point swing in a month, with McConnell now falling well below the magical 50 percent mark.
Lunsford's gains come among Democrats (12-point gain) and independents (10-point gain). 12 percent of Democrats remain undecided, which isn't surprising given that 1) it's a southern state with a significant number of Dixiecrats, and 2) Lunsford has been a historically terrible Democrat. He seems to have learned from his mistakes, however, bending over backwards to try and reassure skittish Democratic constituencies.
Also note the large number of undecided African Americans -- still more evidence of the "reverse Bradley" effect we're seeing in Southern states. In short, black respondents seem skittish about telling pollsters their electoral choices. We can safely assume they'll slot in with the Democratic ticket at an over-90 percent rate. In this case, that could mean an extra two points for Lunsford.
This one is going down to the wire, guys. And if you want to talk about crushing the GOP, eliminating their highest-ranking leader, and perhaps the only one left who can hold their coalition together, would be a stunner -- a true leadership decapitation.
In the presidential, it's McCain 53-39, a slight improvement from last month's 55-37. Bush won the state 60-40 in 2004, so at worse, Obama seems to be performing at John Kerry-levels.
On the web:
Bruce Lunsford for Senate
Bruce Lunsford against Bush-McConnell $700 Billion Bailout!
KY News summary
Lunsford Against Bail Out (Gilbertsville, KY) -- Democratic challenger Bruce Lunsford says he would have voted against the "bail out bill." Lunsford says the doesn't do enough to help people who have lost their homes. The comments came in a debate with Senator Mitch McConnell. Recent polls don't agree on the status of the race. One poll has them very close. Senator McConnell says he has brought hundreds of millions of dollars back to Kentucky for countless projects.
Lunsford Against Bail Out (Gilbertsville, KY) -- Democratic challenger Bruce Lunsford says he would have voted against the "bail out bill." Lunsford says the doesn't do enough to help people who have lost their homes. The comments came in a debate with Senator Mitch McConnell. Recent polls don't agree on the status of the race. One poll has them very close. Senator McConnell says he has brought hundreds of millions of dollars back to Kentucky for countless projects.
Thursday, October 23, 2008
It's 47% to 43% going into the election.
WKYT & WYMT REPORT.
In a bitter race that’s gaining national attention, Republican Sen. Mitch McConnell appears to keeping his slight lead over businessman and Democratic challenger Bruce Lunsford. Forty-seven percent of likely Kentucky voters say they would vote for McConnell versus 43 percent for Lunsford, according to a new poll by WKYT-TV and The Lexington Herald-Leader.
McConnell is seeking his fifth term in the Senate. For more than two decades, he’s headed off numerous Democrats which included current Gov. Steve Beshear during a 1996 matchup. In 2006, McConnell became the Senate minority leader making him the highest ranking Republican in Congress.
Lunsford, a Louisville businessman, is trying to capitalize on the recent economic crisis, fallout from the controversial Congressional rescue plan, and McConnell’s Republican ties to an unpopular President Bush.
But McConnell is running his campaign on what he calls experience in Washington and results. Last year as the leader of the minority party in the United States Senate, your Senator -- the guy you’re looking at -- delivered $500 million for the Commonwealth,” McConnell told supporters at a rally in his bid to tout his influence in Washington.
Lunsford says that number is inflated. “I think it's nice that after five years and fifty-weeks, he's going to spent two weeks on vacation here to get to meet everybody,” Lunsford told reporters recently about how he thinks his campaign is cause for concern for the McConnell camp.
While other recent polls have found the McConnell-Lunsford closer or tied, the WKYT/The Herald-Leader poll did reveal that Lunsford has gained ground since a similar poll in May.
Poll results from October and May
In a bitter race that’s gaining national attention, Republican Sen. Mitch McConnell appears to keeping his slight lead over businessman and Democratic challenger Bruce Lunsford. Forty-seven percent of likely Kentucky voters say they would vote for McConnell versus 43 percent for Lunsford, according to a new poll by WKYT-TV and The Lexington Herald-Leader.
McConnell is seeking his fifth term in the Senate. For more than two decades, he’s headed off numerous Democrats which included current Gov. Steve Beshear during a 1996 matchup. In 2006, McConnell became the Senate minority leader making him the highest ranking Republican in Congress.
Lunsford, a Louisville businessman, is trying to capitalize on the recent economic crisis, fallout from the controversial Congressional rescue plan, and McConnell’s Republican ties to an unpopular President Bush.
But McConnell is running his campaign on what he calls experience in Washington and results. Last year as the leader of the minority party in the United States Senate, your Senator -- the guy you’re looking at -- delivered $500 million for the Commonwealth,” McConnell told supporters at a rally in his bid to tout his influence in Washington.
Lunsford says that number is inflated. “I think it's nice that after five years and fifty-weeks, he's going to spent two weeks on vacation here to get to meet everybody,” Lunsford told reporters recently about how he thinks his campaign is cause for concern for the McConnell camp.
While other recent polls have found the McConnell-Lunsford closer or tied, the WKYT/The Herald-Leader poll did reveal that Lunsford has gained ground since a similar poll in May.
Poll results from October and May
Saturday, October 18, 2008
Friday, October 17, 2008
Wednesday, October 15, 2008
kos
KY-Sen: Bruce Lunsford brought in nearly $3.2 million last quarter, including roughly $800,000 in personal contributions.
The campaign of Democratic U.S. Senate nominee Bruce Lunsford will file its third quarter campaign finance report with the Federal Election Commission today. The report, which covers the months July, August and September, will show that Lunsford collected nearly $3.2 million ($3,191,028.20) in his bid to unseat 24-year incumbent Mitch McConnell. Lunsford collected nearly $800,000 in contributions and personally invested an additional $2.4 million during the summer months. With several public and private polls showing the race to be a dead heat, and the nation in the midst of an economic crisis brought on by Bush-McConnell policies, Lunsford continues to build strong support among Kentucky voters who want change.
The campaign of Democratic U.S. Senate nominee Bruce Lunsford will file its third quarter campaign finance report with the Federal Election Commission today. The report, which covers the months July, August and September, will show that Lunsford collected nearly $3.2 million ($3,191,028.20) in his bid to unseat 24-year incumbent Mitch McConnell. Lunsford collected nearly $800,000 in contributions and personally invested an additional $2.4 million during the summer months. With several public and private polls showing the race to be a dead heat, and the nation in the midst of an economic crisis brought on by Bush-McConnell policies, Lunsford continues to build strong support among Kentucky voters who want change.
Kentucky Sgt. Rudd Killed in Iraq.
Ranger dies in combat in Iraq
Family says Sgt. William Rudd loved being soldier
BY ALAN RIQUELMY - ariquelmy@ledger-enquirer.com --
Sgt. William P. Rudd
Sgt. William P. Rudd, a 27-year-old with the 75th Ranger Regiment based at Fort Benning, died Sunday in Iraq.
Rudd, of Madisonville, Ky., died from wounds he received from small arms fire while on combat patrol in Mosul, Iraq, the U.S. Department of Defense announced Monday. His father said Rudd, who joined the Army in October 2003, loved what he did. That's what brings his family peace.
"When someone loves something so much and something bad happens, we're at peace with it," said William E. Rudd, who still lives in Madisonville. "Through God's strength, we're able to celebrate his life."
Fighters attacked as Rudd was conducting a raid on associates of senior al-Qaida leaders. It was his eighth deployment -- his sixth in Iraq with two previous ones in Afghanistan. He was assigned to the 3rd Battalion, 75th Ranger Regiment, Fort Benning.
A 1999 graduate of Madisonville North Hopkins High School, the future Ranger worked in a factory for a few years. His father said the job wasn't going anywhere.
"During that time, he talked about the military a few times," his father said. "We encouraged him. He said, 'I'm going to do it,' and he did. He loved what he did. He took the politics out of it and did his job. He would not comment about whether it was right or wrong. It was the bravest thing he ever did. It made a man out of a boy. It brought the whole family closer together."
Rudd was assigned to Company B in August 2004 and served as a rifleman, grenadier and fire team leader.
The last time Rudd's father heard from his son was in a Sept. 27 e-mail. He hadn't spoken with him for about two to three weeks.
"We were just talking about Thanksgiving," Rudd said. "He said, 'I better go hunting and spend a few quiet days hunting.' I said, 'I'll make it happen.' "
Rudd's father said the 3rd Battalion sent two people to him Sunday, and they won't leave Madisonville until his son is laid to rest.
"They're here taking care of everything," he said. "The 3rd Battalion has my deepest honor and respect."
In addition to his father, Rudd is survived by his mother, Pamela Lam of Nortonville, Ky.; stepmother, Barbara Rudd, of Madisonville; stepbrother Josh of Madisonville, Ky.; and sister Elizabeth of Nortonville.
Saturday, October 11, 2008
Daily Kos reports "Mitch" in trouble.
"House and Senate Race Roundup: Polls, polls, polls
by brownsox
Fri Oct 10, 2008 at 10:54:49 AM PDT
KY-Sen: Large, large trouble for Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell.
"First, Democrat Bruce Lunsford's internals show a three-point race:
"Garin Hart Yang for Bruce Lunsford. Likely voters. MoE 4.4%.
McConnell (R) 48
Lunsford (D) 45
"Not bad, not bad at all.
"Even Mitchie's own polling shows him falling like a stone, leading by single digits, and under 50% against Lunsford:
"Voter/Consumer Research for Mitch McConnell. 10/5-8. Likely voters. MoE 3.6%. (9/7-9 results)
"McConnell (R) 47 (52)
"Lunsford (D) 38 (35)
"Considering that Mason-Dixon and SurveyUSA both have Lunsford within the margin of error, there doesn't seem to be much doubt that McConnell is in serious trouble.
"Second, Republicans in the Senate are already preparing for the doomsday scenario of losing their Dear Leader:
"Schumer said Wednesday that Kentucky and Georgia — where GOP Sen. Saxby Chambliss is in an unexpectedly tough race — are now on his radar as potential pickups given recent polling.
""They’re both tied. Our private polling mirrors the public polling that these are even-steven races. We believe we can win in both of those states. We’re devoting resources to them. In fact, you can go on our Web site. Our first Kentucky ad starts today," Schumer said.
"And with voters nationwide increasingly unhappy with incumbents, particularly of the GOP variety, Republicans for the first time are quietly grappling with the possibility that they could face a 60-vote Democratic majority in the Senate and a potential leadership shake-up in November."
Let's Ditch Mitch.
by brownsox
Fri Oct 10, 2008 at 10:54:49 AM PDT
KY-Sen: Large, large trouble for Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell.
"First, Democrat Bruce Lunsford's internals show a three-point race:
"Garin Hart Yang for Bruce Lunsford. Likely voters. MoE 4.4%.
McConnell (R) 48
Lunsford (D) 45
"Not bad, not bad at all.
"Even Mitchie's own polling shows him falling like a stone, leading by single digits, and under 50% against Lunsford:
"Voter/Consumer Research for Mitch McConnell. 10/5-8. Likely voters. MoE 3.6%. (9/7-9 results)
"McConnell (R) 47 (52)
"Lunsford (D) 38 (35)
"Considering that Mason-Dixon and SurveyUSA both have Lunsford within the margin of error, there doesn't seem to be much doubt that McConnell is in serious trouble.
"Second, Republicans in the Senate are already preparing for the doomsday scenario of losing their Dear Leader:
"Schumer said Wednesday that Kentucky and Georgia — where GOP Sen. Saxby Chambliss is in an unexpectedly tough race — are now on his radar as potential pickups given recent polling.
""They’re both tied. Our private polling mirrors the public polling that these are even-steven races. We believe we can win in both of those states. We’re devoting resources to them. In fact, you can go on our Web site. Our first Kentucky ad starts today," Schumer said.
"And with voters nationwide increasingly unhappy with incumbents, particularly of the GOP variety, Republicans for the first time are quietly grappling with the possibility that they could face a 60-vote Democratic majority in the Senate and a potential leadership shake-up in November."
Let's Ditch Mitch.
Washington Post blog reports on Lunsford/McConnell Race.
"washingtonpost.com's Politics Blog
"Friday Senate Line: 60 in Sight?
"What was once only a pipe dream is starting to look like a real possibility.
"We speak not of Britney Spears' musical comeback but rather the prospect of Democrats controlling 60 seats -- a filibuster-proof majority -- following the November election.
"In a huddle with reporters earlier this week in Washington, Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee Chairman Chuck Schumer (N.Y.) acknowledged that his party's chances of reaching the 60-seat plateau were "better than they were two weeks ago" -- the result of an across-the-board collapse in Republican numbers due to the economic crisis and handling of the bailout bill by Congress. (Yes, we know Democrats control the House and Senate. But, the American public overwhelmingly blamed President Bush and House Republicans for the initial failure of the "rescue" legislation.)
"And, respected non-partisan observers are also beginning to openly speculate about the possibility. In a must-read column earlier this week, Stu Rothenberg wrote: "Where I once wrote in this space that Democrats had a chance of reaching 60 seats in 2010, I now can't rule out 60 seats for this November."
"Our take? Sixty seats for Democrats remains something less than a 50-50 proposition but a relatively plausible path to a filibuster-proof majority does exist.
"Four Republican-held seats -- Virginia, New Mexico, Colorado and New Hampshire -- are either done deals for Democrats or getting there. In at least four others -- North Carolina, Oregon, Minnesota and Alaska -- the Republican incumbent is either tied or trailing their Democratic challenger.
"That's eight seats where Democrats have any even money or better shot at takeovers on Nov. 4. And, assuming they can reelect Sen. Mary Landrieu (D-La.) they must pick off one of three seats to get to 60: Kentucky, Georgia or Mississippi. (Scroll down to see which of that trio we believe presents Democrats with their best chance.)
"Could Democrats run the table? Yes. The decided tilt of the national environment toward their party has grown even more pronounced in recent weeks. But, Kentucky, Georgia and Mississippi are less than friendly territory for Democrats at the federal level and the GOP incumbents in each state are doing everything they can to avoid being washed away in the wave.
"Stay tuned.
"As always, the number one ranked race on the Line is the most likely to switch parties in the fall. Agree or disagree with our picks? The comments section (eagerly) awaits.
"To the Line!
"10. Louisiana (D): Democrats are increasingly publicly confident about Landrieu's chances at reelection but the DSCC's decision to begin spending money on television against state Treasurer John Kennedy (R) belies that they still retain some nervousness about her chances. Republicans are taking an interesting strategic tact in this race -- painting the Landrieu race as voters' chance to continue the cleanup of Louisiana politics that began with the election of Gov. Bobby Jindal (R) last year. In a neutral political year, Landrieu would be in deep trouble. But this is not a normal political year. (Previous ranking: 9)
"9. Kentucky (R): This election cycle has taught us to never say never in politics. We never thought Sen. Mitch McConnell, one of the savviest political minds in American politics, would be in a real race against Bruce Lunsford (D), whose sole distinction in politics before this race was two unsuccessful gubernatorial bids over the past five years. And yet, public polling of late has shown McConnell and Lunsford in a dead heat and the DSCC is now on TV bashing McConnell on the bailout. Will the underfunded National Republican Senatorial Committee respond in kind? And, if not, can McConnell withstand the ad onslaught? (Previous ranking: N/A) * * *"
Let's Ditch Mitch.
"Friday Senate Line: 60 in Sight?
"What was once only a pipe dream is starting to look like a real possibility.
"We speak not of Britney Spears' musical comeback but rather the prospect of Democrats controlling 60 seats -- a filibuster-proof majority -- following the November election.
"In a huddle with reporters earlier this week in Washington, Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee Chairman Chuck Schumer (N.Y.) acknowledged that his party's chances of reaching the 60-seat plateau were "better than they were two weeks ago" -- the result of an across-the-board collapse in Republican numbers due to the economic crisis and handling of the bailout bill by Congress. (Yes, we know Democrats control the House and Senate. But, the American public overwhelmingly blamed President Bush and House Republicans for the initial failure of the "rescue" legislation.)
"And, respected non-partisan observers are also beginning to openly speculate about the possibility. In a must-read column earlier this week, Stu Rothenberg wrote: "Where I once wrote in this space that Democrats had a chance of reaching 60 seats in 2010, I now can't rule out 60 seats for this November."
"Our take? Sixty seats for Democrats remains something less than a 50-50 proposition but a relatively plausible path to a filibuster-proof majority does exist.
"Four Republican-held seats -- Virginia, New Mexico, Colorado and New Hampshire -- are either done deals for Democrats or getting there. In at least four others -- North Carolina, Oregon, Minnesota and Alaska -- the Republican incumbent is either tied or trailing their Democratic challenger.
"That's eight seats where Democrats have any even money or better shot at takeovers on Nov. 4. And, assuming they can reelect Sen. Mary Landrieu (D-La.) they must pick off one of three seats to get to 60: Kentucky, Georgia or Mississippi. (Scroll down to see which of that trio we believe presents Democrats with their best chance.)
"Could Democrats run the table? Yes. The decided tilt of the national environment toward their party has grown even more pronounced in recent weeks. But, Kentucky, Georgia and Mississippi are less than friendly territory for Democrats at the federal level and the GOP incumbents in each state are doing everything they can to avoid being washed away in the wave.
"Stay tuned.
"As always, the number one ranked race on the Line is the most likely to switch parties in the fall. Agree or disagree with our picks? The comments section (eagerly) awaits.
"To the Line!
"10. Louisiana (D): Democrats are increasingly publicly confident about Landrieu's chances at reelection but the DSCC's decision to begin spending money on television against state Treasurer John Kennedy (R) belies that they still retain some nervousness about her chances. Republicans are taking an interesting strategic tact in this race -- painting the Landrieu race as voters' chance to continue the cleanup of Louisiana politics that began with the election of Gov. Bobby Jindal (R) last year. In a neutral political year, Landrieu would be in deep trouble. But this is not a normal political year. (Previous ranking: 9)
"9. Kentucky (R): This election cycle has taught us to never say never in politics. We never thought Sen. Mitch McConnell, one of the savviest political minds in American politics, would be in a real race against Bruce Lunsford (D), whose sole distinction in politics before this race was two unsuccessful gubernatorial bids over the past five years. And yet, public polling of late has shown McConnell and Lunsford in a dead heat and the DSCC is now on TV bashing McConnell on the bailout. Will the underfunded National Republican Senatorial Committee respond in kind? And, if not, can McConnell withstand the ad onslaught? (Previous ranking: N/A) * * *"
Let's Ditch Mitch.
Financial Woes Boost Democrats (Associated Press)!
"Financial woes boost Democrats in Congress races
"By JULIE HIRSCHFELD DAVIS – 3 hours ago
"WASHINGTON (AP) — The financial turmoil that has devastated the stock market is also battering Republicans in congressional races, giving Democrats a chance to topple GOP incumbents once considered safe and wrest seats in pivotal districts and states.
"Voters' deepening anxiety about the economy following the enactment of a $700 billion financial industry bailout has created the conditions, just over three weeks from the Nov. 4 election, for an anti-Republican tide that could hand Democrats insurmountable majorities on both sides of the Capitol, according to lawmakers and strategists in both parties.
"It is hurting every Republican across the board. This environment has just become very toxic for us," said Republican pollster Tony Fabrizio. "It could very easily be a wave" in Democrats' favor.
"Majority Democrats who hold a 51-49 Senate majority now have solid leads in five races, realistic chances of picking up as many as nine seats and believe they are within reach of their longer-shot goal of capturing 60 seats.
* * *
"Even the Senate's Republican leader, Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, has lost ground against Democrat Bruce Lunsford, although both Chambliss and McConnell still lead in most public polls. McConnell wrote constituents a lengthy letter this past week defending his vote for the government rescue plan.
"It's not the bailout itself. It's the conditions leading up to needing the bailout and the difficulty in the economy that is sending voters in our direction," said Sen. Charles E. Schumer, D-N.Y., his party's Senate campaign committee chief.
* * *
"Deepening economic worries have cost Republican presidential nominee John McCain ground at a crucial point in the race, and had the same impact on GOP candidates, said Rep. Tom Cole of Oklahoma, the GOP's House campaign chief.
"If anybody thinks this issue has hit each side equally just look at (McCain's) numbers," Cole said. "It's made a difficult situation much more challenging" for congressional Republicans.
* * *
"Republicans already were facing an uphill battle in congressional races this year. They started out at a numerical disadvantage, having to defend many more seats than Democrats because more of them were retiring. In the Senate, a quirk of the political calendar added to their challenge: Republicans are defending 23 seats this year and Democrats' 12. All 435 House seats — including one vacancy — are up for grabs.
"Democrats have solid chances to win five Senate seats by unseating incumbent Sens. Ted Stevens in Alaska and John E. Sununu in New Hampshire, and capturing up-for-grabs seats in Colorado, New Mexico and Virginia. Polls indicate they have realistic shots at Sen. Norm Coleman in Minnesota, Dole in North Carolina and Sen. Gordon Smith of Oregon, and in a special election against Sen. Roger Wicker of Mississippi to serve out the remainder of retired Sen. Trent Lott's term.
"Chambliss and McConnell would be icing on the cake.
* * *"
Associated Press writers Laurie Kellman and Jennifer Loven contributed to this report.
"By JULIE HIRSCHFELD DAVIS – 3 hours ago
"WASHINGTON (AP) — The financial turmoil that has devastated the stock market is also battering Republicans in congressional races, giving Democrats a chance to topple GOP incumbents once considered safe and wrest seats in pivotal districts and states.
"Voters' deepening anxiety about the economy following the enactment of a $700 billion financial industry bailout has created the conditions, just over three weeks from the Nov. 4 election, for an anti-Republican tide that could hand Democrats insurmountable majorities on both sides of the Capitol, according to lawmakers and strategists in both parties.
"It is hurting every Republican across the board. This environment has just become very toxic for us," said Republican pollster Tony Fabrizio. "It could very easily be a wave" in Democrats' favor.
"Majority Democrats who hold a 51-49 Senate majority now have solid leads in five races, realistic chances of picking up as many as nine seats and believe they are within reach of their longer-shot goal of capturing 60 seats.
* * *
"Even the Senate's Republican leader, Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, has lost ground against Democrat Bruce Lunsford, although both Chambliss and McConnell still lead in most public polls. McConnell wrote constituents a lengthy letter this past week defending his vote for the government rescue plan.
"It's not the bailout itself. It's the conditions leading up to needing the bailout and the difficulty in the economy that is sending voters in our direction," said Sen. Charles E. Schumer, D-N.Y., his party's Senate campaign committee chief.
* * *
"Deepening economic worries have cost Republican presidential nominee John McCain ground at a crucial point in the race, and had the same impact on GOP candidates, said Rep. Tom Cole of Oklahoma, the GOP's House campaign chief.
"If anybody thinks this issue has hit each side equally just look at (McCain's) numbers," Cole said. "It's made a difficult situation much more challenging" for congressional Republicans.
* * *
"Republicans already were facing an uphill battle in congressional races this year. They started out at a numerical disadvantage, having to defend many more seats than Democrats because more of them were retiring. In the Senate, a quirk of the political calendar added to their challenge: Republicans are defending 23 seats this year and Democrats' 12. All 435 House seats — including one vacancy — are up for grabs.
"Democrats have solid chances to win five Senate seats by unseating incumbent Sens. Ted Stevens in Alaska and John E. Sununu in New Hampshire, and capturing up-for-grabs seats in Colorado, New Mexico and Virginia. Polls indicate they have realistic shots at Sen. Norm Coleman in Minnesota, Dole in North Carolina and Sen. Gordon Smith of Oregon, and in a special election against Sen. Roger Wicker of Mississippi to serve out the remainder of retired Sen. Trent Lott's term.
"Chambliss and McConnell would be icing on the cake.
* * *"
Associated Press writers Laurie Kellman and Jennifer Loven contributed to this report.
Saturday, October 04, 2008
Hal Rogers voted for second $700 Billion Bush Bailout Bill!
House Roll Call: How They Voted on Bailout Bill
Friday, October 3, 2008 3:42 PM
Article Font Size
The 263-171 roll call Friday by which the House approved a $700 billion government bailout bill for the battered financial industry.
A "yes" vote is a vote to pass the bill.
Voting yes were 172 Democrats and 91 Republicans.
Voting no were 63 Democrats and 108 Republicans.
X denotes those not voting.
There is 1 vacancy in the 435-member House.
ALABAMA
Democrats — Cramer, Y; Davis, Y.
Republicans — Aderholt, N; Bachus, Y; Bonner, Y; Everett, Y; Rogers, Y.
ALASKA
Republicans — Young, N.
ARIZONA
Democrats — Giffords, Y; Grijalva, N; Mitchell, Y; Pastor, Y.
Republicans — Flake, N; Franks, N; Renzi, N; Shadegg, Y.
ARKANSAS
Democrats — Berry, Y; Ross, Y; Snyder, Y.
Republicans — Boozman, Y.
CALIFORNIA
Democrats — Baca, Y; Becerra, N; Berman, Y; Capps, Y; Cardoza, Y; Costa, Y; Davis, Y; Eshoo, Y; Farr, Y; Filner, N; Harman, Y; Honda, Y; Lee, Y; Lofgren, Zoe, Y; Matsui, Y; McNerney, Y; Miller, George, Y; Napolitano, N; Pelosi, Y; Richardson, Y; Roybal-Allard, N; Sanchez, Linda T., N; Sanchez, Loretta, N; Schiff, Y; Sherman, N; Solis, Y; Speier, Y; Stark, N; Tauscher, Y; Thompson, Y; Waters, Y; Watson, Y; Waxman, Y; Woolsey, Y.
Republicans — Bilbray, N; Bono Mack, Y; Calvert, Y; Campbell, Y; Doolittle, N; Dreier, Y; Gallegly, N; Herger, Y; Hunter, N; Issa, N; Lewis, Y; Lungren, Daniel E., Y; McCarthy, N; McKeon, Y; Miller, Gary, Y; Nunes, N; Radanovich, Y; Rohrabacher, N; Royce, N.
COLORADO
Democrats — DeGette, Y; Perlmutter, Y; Salazar, N; Udall, N.
Republicans — Lamborn, N; Musgrave, N; Tancredo, Y.
CONNECTICUT
Democrats — Courtney, N; DeLauro, Y; Larson, Y; Murphy, Y.
Republicans — Shays, Y.
DELAWARE
Republicans — Castle, Y.
FLORIDA
Democrats — Boyd, Y; Brown, Corrine, Y; Castor, N; Hastings, Y; Klein, Y; Mahoney, Y; Meek, Y; Wasserman Schultz, Y; Wexler, Y.
Republicans — Bilirakis, N; Brown-Waite, Ginny, N; Buchanan, Y; Crenshaw, Y; Diaz-Balart, L., N; Diaz-Balart, M., N; Feeney, N; Keller, N; Mack, N; Mica, N; Miller, N; Putnam, Y; Ros-Lehtinen, Y; Stearns, N; Weldon, Y; Young, N.
GEORGIA
Democrats — Barrow, N; Bishop, Y; Johnson, N; Lewis, Y; Marshall, Y; Scott, Y.
Republicans — Broun, N; Deal, N; Gingrey, N; Kingston, N; Linder, N; Price, N; Westmoreland, N.
HAWAII
Democrats — Abercrombie, Y; Hirono, Y.
IDAHO
Republicans — Sali, N; Simpson, Y.
ILLINOIS
Democrats — Bean, Y; Costello, N; Davis, Y; Emanuel, Y; Foster, Y; Gutierrez, Y; Hare, Y; Jackson, Y; Lipinski, N; Rush, Y; Schakowsky, Y.
Republicans — Biggert, Y; Johnson, N; Kirk, Y; LaHood, Y; Manzullo, N; Roskam, N; Shimkus, N; Weller, Y.
INDIANA
Democrats — Carson, Y; Donnelly, Y; Ellsworth, Y; Hill, N; Visclosky, N.
Republicans — Burton, N; Buyer, N; Pence, N; Souder, Y.
IOWA
Democrats — Boswell, Y; Braley, Y; Loebsack, Y.
Republicans — King, N; Latham, N.
KANSAS
Democrats — Boyda, N; Moore, Y.
Republicans — Moran, N; Tiahrt, N.
KENTUCKY
Democrats — Chandler, N; Yarmuth, Y.
Republicans — Davis, N; Lewis, Y; Rogers, Y; Whitfield, N.
Friday, October 3, 2008 3:42 PM
Article Font Size
The 263-171 roll call Friday by which the House approved a $700 billion government bailout bill for the battered financial industry.
A "yes" vote is a vote to pass the bill.
Voting yes were 172 Democrats and 91 Republicans.
Voting no were 63 Democrats and 108 Republicans.
X denotes those not voting.
There is 1 vacancy in the 435-member House.
ALABAMA
Democrats — Cramer, Y; Davis, Y.
Republicans — Aderholt, N; Bachus, Y; Bonner, Y; Everett, Y; Rogers, Y.
ALASKA
Republicans — Young, N.
ARIZONA
Democrats — Giffords, Y; Grijalva, N; Mitchell, Y; Pastor, Y.
Republicans — Flake, N; Franks, N; Renzi, N; Shadegg, Y.
ARKANSAS
Democrats — Berry, Y; Ross, Y; Snyder, Y.
Republicans — Boozman, Y.
CALIFORNIA
Democrats — Baca, Y; Becerra, N; Berman, Y; Capps, Y; Cardoza, Y; Costa, Y; Davis, Y; Eshoo, Y; Farr, Y; Filner, N; Harman, Y; Honda, Y; Lee, Y; Lofgren, Zoe, Y; Matsui, Y; McNerney, Y; Miller, George, Y; Napolitano, N; Pelosi, Y; Richardson, Y; Roybal-Allard, N; Sanchez, Linda T., N; Sanchez, Loretta, N; Schiff, Y; Sherman, N; Solis, Y; Speier, Y; Stark, N; Tauscher, Y; Thompson, Y; Waters, Y; Watson, Y; Waxman, Y; Woolsey, Y.
Republicans — Bilbray, N; Bono Mack, Y; Calvert, Y; Campbell, Y; Doolittle, N; Dreier, Y; Gallegly, N; Herger, Y; Hunter, N; Issa, N; Lewis, Y; Lungren, Daniel E., Y; McCarthy, N; McKeon, Y; Miller, Gary, Y; Nunes, N; Radanovich, Y; Rohrabacher, N; Royce, N.
COLORADO
Democrats — DeGette, Y; Perlmutter, Y; Salazar, N; Udall, N.
Republicans — Lamborn, N; Musgrave, N; Tancredo, Y.
CONNECTICUT
Democrats — Courtney, N; DeLauro, Y; Larson, Y; Murphy, Y.
Republicans — Shays, Y.
DELAWARE
Republicans — Castle, Y.
FLORIDA
Democrats — Boyd, Y; Brown, Corrine, Y; Castor, N; Hastings, Y; Klein, Y; Mahoney, Y; Meek, Y; Wasserman Schultz, Y; Wexler, Y.
Republicans — Bilirakis, N; Brown-Waite, Ginny, N; Buchanan, Y; Crenshaw, Y; Diaz-Balart, L., N; Diaz-Balart, M., N; Feeney, N; Keller, N; Mack, N; Mica, N; Miller, N; Putnam, Y; Ros-Lehtinen, Y; Stearns, N; Weldon, Y; Young, N.
GEORGIA
Democrats — Barrow, N; Bishop, Y; Johnson, N; Lewis, Y; Marshall, Y; Scott, Y.
Republicans — Broun, N; Deal, N; Gingrey, N; Kingston, N; Linder, N; Price, N; Westmoreland, N.
HAWAII
Democrats — Abercrombie, Y; Hirono, Y.
IDAHO
Republicans — Sali, N; Simpson, Y.
ILLINOIS
Democrats — Bean, Y; Costello, N; Davis, Y; Emanuel, Y; Foster, Y; Gutierrez, Y; Hare, Y; Jackson, Y; Lipinski, N; Rush, Y; Schakowsky, Y.
Republicans — Biggert, Y; Johnson, N; Kirk, Y; LaHood, Y; Manzullo, N; Roskam, N; Shimkus, N; Weller, Y.
INDIANA
Democrats — Carson, Y; Donnelly, Y; Ellsworth, Y; Hill, N; Visclosky, N.
Republicans — Burton, N; Buyer, N; Pence, N; Souder, Y.
IOWA
Democrats — Boswell, Y; Braley, Y; Loebsack, Y.
Republicans — King, N; Latham, N.
KANSAS
Democrats — Boyda, N; Moore, Y.
Republicans — Moran, N; Tiahrt, N.
KENTUCKY
Democrats — Chandler, N; Yarmuth, Y.
Republicans — Davis, N; Lewis, Y; Rogers, Y; Whitfield, N.
"Mitch" ducks KET1 debate.
KET responds to Senate debate situation
By Trey Pollard
"The long-time broadcaster of candidate forums for significant races in the Commonwealth, Kentucky Education Television released a statement last night following the news that U.S. Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-Louisville) would not be participating in the network’s scheduled Oct. 27 Senate forum.
“We regret if there was any misunderstanding or miscommunication regarding KET’s U.S. Senate candidate forum,” said KET’s Deputy Executive Director, Shae Hopkins, in a statement.
"McConnell’s campaign announced its candidate would participate in one further debate with Democrat Bruce Lunsford (D-Louisville) – an Oct. 23 event in western Kentucky, at the Kentucky Dam Village. Claiming a schedule conflict prevented McConnell from attending the KET event, the Republican’s campaign said it “repeatedly asked KET to film” the western Kentucky event instead.
"KET noted that request was made earlier this week, and said it was against their policy to broadcast debate events they did not produce.
“Invitations for an Oct. 27 candidate forum were sent to both the McConnell and Lunsford campaigns on July 30. On Sept. 30, the McConnell campaign asked KET to broadcast the Oct. 23 debate at Kentucky Dam Village, and we informed them of our longstanding practice of broadcasting only KET-produced forums,” said Hopkins. “KET remains open to working with both campaigns on any obstacles to either candidate’s participation.”
"It presently appears none of the Senate race debates will hit statewide airwaves. The candidates previously had joint appearances at an agricultural forum in late August and a debate in Northern Kentucky in mid-September.
"Announcing McConnell was scheduled for one more event, the McConnell camp said they would post footage of both those previous appearances and the western Kentucky debate on a website it created: www.kysenatedebate.com.
"Lunsford earlier announced he accepted invitations to eight debates around the state.
"Send tips to trey.pollard@politickerky.com"
I've been there before. In the spring of 2006, I appeared on KET1 in the Democratic candidates' debate for U.S. House KY-5. Apparently I bested James Tapley in the debate, because I beat him in the Democratic Primary later that year and won the Democratic nomination for U.S. House KY-5. In the spring of 2008, I appeared with seven Democrats in a debate for the Democratic Primary for the U.S. Senate. I thought that all seven candidates appearing had good points raised. Apparently the statewide viewing audience thought Bruce Lunsford won, because he won the Primary a few weeks later.
"Mitch" McConnell is stiff-arming Bruce Lunsford in this fall's planned debate of the general election candidates for U.S. Senate from Kentucky. The same thing happened to me in 2006 in the Stepp vs. Hal Rogers general election race for U.S. House; Hal Rogers did not show up for that debate. KET1 and I went ahead with the debate without Hal Rogers; but Hal Rogers won. Is "Mitch" so far ahead of Bruce that "Mitch" can easily win without appearing at a debate? I don't think so. I'd say that "Mitch" saw how Bruce Lunsford demolished his six opponents in the Democratic Primary debate this spring, and that "Mitch" is afraid to go on a statewide debate with Bruce on KET1. Either way, "Mitch" loses: if he goes toe-to-toe with the winner of the seven man Democratic Primary debate he will probably lose and lose a lot of votes as well; if he stays out of the debate, he will probably lose the seven per cent of the vote that is offended by candidates hiding from debates--so either way, "Mitch" gets ditched by the voters of Kentucky and Bruce Lunsford comes up as our new U.S. Senator. Kenneth Stepp.
By Trey Pollard
"The long-time broadcaster of candidate forums for significant races in the Commonwealth, Kentucky Education Television released a statement last night following the news that U.S. Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-Louisville) would not be participating in the network’s scheduled Oct. 27 Senate forum.
“We regret if there was any misunderstanding or miscommunication regarding KET’s U.S. Senate candidate forum,” said KET’s Deputy Executive Director, Shae Hopkins, in a statement.
"McConnell’s campaign announced its candidate would participate in one further debate with Democrat Bruce Lunsford (D-Louisville) – an Oct. 23 event in western Kentucky, at the Kentucky Dam Village. Claiming a schedule conflict prevented McConnell from attending the KET event, the Republican’s campaign said it “repeatedly asked KET to film” the western Kentucky event instead.
"KET noted that request was made earlier this week, and said it was against their policy to broadcast debate events they did not produce.
“Invitations for an Oct. 27 candidate forum were sent to both the McConnell and Lunsford campaigns on July 30. On Sept. 30, the McConnell campaign asked KET to broadcast the Oct. 23 debate at Kentucky Dam Village, and we informed them of our longstanding practice of broadcasting only KET-produced forums,” said Hopkins. “KET remains open to working with both campaigns on any obstacles to either candidate’s participation.”
"It presently appears none of the Senate race debates will hit statewide airwaves. The candidates previously had joint appearances at an agricultural forum in late August and a debate in Northern Kentucky in mid-September.
"Announcing McConnell was scheduled for one more event, the McConnell camp said they would post footage of both those previous appearances and the western Kentucky debate on a website it created: www.kysenatedebate.com.
"Lunsford earlier announced he accepted invitations to eight debates around the state.
"Send tips to trey.pollard@politickerky.com"
I've been there before. In the spring of 2006, I appeared on KET1 in the Democratic candidates' debate for U.S. House KY-5. Apparently I bested James Tapley in the debate, because I beat him in the Democratic Primary later that year and won the Democratic nomination for U.S. House KY-5. In the spring of 2008, I appeared with seven Democrats in a debate for the Democratic Primary for the U.S. Senate. I thought that all seven candidates appearing had good points raised. Apparently the statewide viewing audience thought Bruce Lunsford won, because he won the Primary a few weeks later.
"Mitch" McConnell is stiff-arming Bruce Lunsford in this fall's planned debate of the general election candidates for U.S. Senate from Kentucky. The same thing happened to me in 2006 in the Stepp vs. Hal Rogers general election race for U.S. House; Hal Rogers did not show up for that debate. KET1 and I went ahead with the debate without Hal Rogers; but Hal Rogers won. Is "Mitch" so far ahead of Bruce that "Mitch" can easily win without appearing at a debate? I don't think so. I'd say that "Mitch" saw how Bruce Lunsford demolished his six opponents in the Democratic Primary debate this spring, and that "Mitch" is afraid to go on a statewide debate with Bruce on KET1. Either way, "Mitch" loses: if he goes toe-to-toe with the winner of the seven man Democratic Primary debate he will probably lose and lose a lot of votes as well; if he stays out of the debate, he will probably lose the seven per cent of the vote that is offended by candidates hiding from debates--so either way, "Mitch" gets ditched by the voters of Kentucky and Bruce Lunsford comes up as our new U.S. Senator. Kenneth Stepp.
Friday, October 03, 2008
"Mitch" voted for Bush Bailout!
how they voted
McConnell, Hoosier senators vote for bailout
By James R. Carroll • jcarroll@courier-journal.com • October 2, 2008
Read Comments(5)Recommend Print this page E-mail this article Share Del.icio.us
Facebook
Digg
Reddit
Newsvine
Buzz up! WASHINGTON -- The financial rescue plan passed the Senate last night with the help of three Kentucky and Indiana members who said action was necessary to prevent a national crisis from deepening.
"The current crisis may have its roots in the actions of a few," Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., told his colleagues before voting for the plan. "But its effects could potentially reach into every single home in Kentucky and every other home in America."
Sens. Evan Bayh, D-Ind., and Richard Lugar, R-Ind., also voted for the plan.
"This is a distasteful but necessary step to protect millions of innocent people from the malfeasance of a few," Bayh said.
But Sen. Jim Bunning, R-Ky., remained opposed to the rescue, as he has been since the Bush administration first proposed it, saying "it is still the same old bailout for Wall Street with a few extra sweeteners intended to buy off votes.
"In the end, this bill still puts the taxpayers on the hook for Wall Street's losses and takes America's free-market system down the path towards socialism."
The Senate took the unusual procedural step of taking up its own rescue bill after the House narrowly defeated a similar measure Monday, precipitating a 777-point drop in the Dow Jones industrial average. The House is expected to consider the Senate measure tomorrow.
In contrast to the House, where area lawmakers said they opposed the bill because of widespread outrage among constituents against what they viewed as a bailout for "fat cats," Senate supporters of the measure said they were hearing from constituents worried about their businesses, savings and jobs.
"The problem we face as a nation is urgent and unprecedented," McConnell said. "For now, the practical problem we face is this: Credit, the lifeblood of our economy, is frozen. And unless we act, it's expected to remain that way. This means that the lives of ordinary American families could be severely disrupted, commerce could dry up and millions of jobs could be lost."
The Senate GOP leader said shock waves were spreading across the nation.
He said small-business owners in Kentucky were writing to him, warning of skyrocketing interest rates.
A woman in Central Kentucky told McConnell she feared that she might have to sell off part of the family farm, while a La Grange businessman told him the interest rate on a loan for an office building tripled in the past week.
"This economic rescue plan is a necessary effort to protect the vast majority of Americans -- whose day-to-day lives depend on ready access to credit -- from the misdeeds of Wall Street," McConnell said. "And, at this point, doing nothing to prevent an economic collapse is no longer an option."
Lugar, who worked on the financial rescue plan for Chrysler Corp. in 1979, agreed.
"Failure to pass such legislation would lead to massive unemployment and failure of small business and farming operations in Indiana. That is unacceptable," he said. "The financial rescue legislation will restore credit flow to homeowners, businesses, farmers and all the people who, by the very nature of their businesses, need to borrow money to maintain their activity and keep employees."
He and other supporters of the bill said there are proper and sufficient safeguards to protect taxpayer money, oversee the rescue process and prevent executives being rewarded for their mistakes.
Those senators also praised a provision that applies the proceeds from the rescue plan to reduce the national debt.
Lugar's office said that in the case of Chrysler, which at the time was criticized as a bailout, the aid package came with safeguards for taxpayers' money and major concessions from the company and the unions. In the end, the federal loans were paid back, with interest, to the government -- in just four years, which was ahead of schedule, Lugar's office said.
Bayh said there was no alternative to the rescue plan.
"Those who will pay the price for inaction are the worker at the canceled construction project, the small-business owner who can no longer make payroll, the student who will not be able to attend college because she can't get a loan, the senior citizen who can no longer make ends meet because her nest egg has been devastated," he said.
Bunning, however, said the rescue plan was "ridiculous."
He said he agrees there are "extreme tensions in the financial markets right now."
But he said comments by Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson and Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke, who have warned of potential catastrophe without congressional action, have made matters worse.
"We all know that those problems could soon have an impact on businesses and individuals who had nothing to do with the mortgage mess" Bunning said. "But I do not believe that this bailout bill is the solution. This is a short-term fix that does nothing to address what is really a long-term problem."
He said the rescue bill might help the balance sheets on Wall Street.
"But nowhere does the bill require that newfound money be lent to anyone on Main Street, and I doubt it will happen," Bunning said.
Reporter James R. Carroll can be reached at (202) 906-8141.
McConnell, Hoosier senators vote for bailout
By James R. Carroll • jcarroll@courier-journal.com • October 2, 2008
Read Comments(5)Recommend Print this page E-mail this article Share Del.icio.us
Digg
Newsvine
Buzz up! WASHINGTON -- The financial rescue plan passed the Senate last night with the help of three Kentucky and Indiana members who said action was necessary to prevent a national crisis from deepening.
"The current crisis may have its roots in the actions of a few," Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., told his colleagues before voting for the plan. "But its effects could potentially reach into every single home in Kentucky and every other home in America."
Sens. Evan Bayh, D-Ind., and Richard Lugar, R-Ind., also voted for the plan.
"This is a distasteful but necessary step to protect millions of innocent people from the malfeasance of a few," Bayh said.
But Sen. Jim Bunning, R-Ky., remained opposed to the rescue, as he has been since the Bush administration first proposed it, saying "it is still the same old bailout for Wall Street with a few extra sweeteners intended to buy off votes.
"In the end, this bill still puts the taxpayers on the hook for Wall Street's losses and takes America's free-market system down the path towards socialism."
The Senate took the unusual procedural step of taking up its own rescue bill after the House narrowly defeated a similar measure Monday, precipitating a 777-point drop in the Dow Jones industrial average. The House is expected to consider the Senate measure tomorrow.
In contrast to the House, where area lawmakers said they opposed the bill because of widespread outrage among constituents against what they viewed as a bailout for "fat cats," Senate supporters of the measure said they were hearing from constituents worried about their businesses, savings and jobs.
"The problem we face as a nation is urgent and unprecedented," McConnell said. "For now, the practical problem we face is this: Credit, the lifeblood of our economy, is frozen. And unless we act, it's expected to remain that way. This means that the lives of ordinary American families could be severely disrupted, commerce could dry up and millions of jobs could be lost."
The Senate GOP leader said shock waves were spreading across the nation.
He said small-business owners in Kentucky were writing to him, warning of skyrocketing interest rates.
A woman in Central Kentucky told McConnell she feared that she might have to sell off part of the family farm, while a La Grange businessman told him the interest rate on a loan for an office building tripled in the past week.
"This economic rescue plan is a necessary effort to protect the vast majority of Americans -- whose day-to-day lives depend on ready access to credit -- from the misdeeds of Wall Street," McConnell said. "And, at this point, doing nothing to prevent an economic collapse is no longer an option."
Lugar, who worked on the financial rescue plan for Chrysler Corp. in 1979, agreed.
"Failure to pass such legislation would lead to massive unemployment and failure of small business and farming operations in Indiana. That is unacceptable," he said. "The financial rescue legislation will restore credit flow to homeowners, businesses, farmers and all the people who, by the very nature of their businesses, need to borrow money to maintain their activity and keep employees."
He and other supporters of the bill said there are proper and sufficient safeguards to protect taxpayer money, oversee the rescue process and prevent executives being rewarded for their mistakes.
Those senators also praised a provision that applies the proceeds from the rescue plan to reduce the national debt.
Lugar's office said that in the case of Chrysler, which at the time was criticized as a bailout, the aid package came with safeguards for taxpayers' money and major concessions from the company and the unions. In the end, the federal loans were paid back, with interest, to the government -- in just four years, which was ahead of schedule, Lugar's office said.
Bayh said there was no alternative to the rescue plan.
"Those who will pay the price for inaction are the worker at the canceled construction project, the small-business owner who can no longer make payroll, the student who will not be able to attend college because she can't get a loan, the senior citizen who can no longer make ends meet because her nest egg has been devastated," he said.
Bunning, however, said the rescue plan was "ridiculous."
He said he agrees there are "extreme tensions in the financial markets right now."
But he said comments by Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson and Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke, who have warned of potential catastrophe without congressional action, have made matters worse.
"We all know that those problems could soon have an impact on businesses and individuals who had nothing to do with the mortgage mess" Bunning said. "But I do not believe that this bailout bill is the solution. This is a short-term fix that does nothing to address what is really a long-term problem."
He said the rescue bill might help the balance sheets on Wall Street.
"But nowhere does the bill require that newfound money be lent to anyone on Main Street, and I doubt it will happen," Bunning said.
Reporter James R. Carroll can be reached at (202) 906-8141.
McConnell on the way out.
McConnell on way out
posted by Cleareye
The American taxpayer has been swindled by politicians bought and paid for by Wall Street, Mitch McConnell is their leader. Never in the history of the world have so many been cheated by so few for so much money. The completely out of control greed is an embarrassment to the country's remaining reputation. Bush, with McConnell's sycophantic assistance has brought this country to the state of a beggar nation and all because of the personal greed of a few thousand business leaders who think the American workers are only their personal slaves.
Take a good look at what the Republicans have wrought: 1. Your grandchildren will be indebted to the Chinese for all of their lives; 2. Your income will be devoted to paying obscenely profitable insurance companies for services that they will not be willing to render short of a court order; 3. What's left of your earnings must go to the banks for 'credit' services interest rates that you don't need and shouldn't use.
posted by Cleareye
The American taxpayer has been swindled by politicians bought and paid for by Wall Street, Mitch McConnell is their leader. Never in the history of the world have so many been cheated by so few for so much money. The completely out of control greed is an embarrassment to the country's remaining reputation. Bush, with McConnell's sycophantic assistance has brought this country to the state of a beggar nation and all because of the personal greed of a few thousand business leaders who think the American workers are only their personal slaves.
Take a good look at what the Republicans have wrought: 1. Your grandchildren will be indebted to the Chinese for all of their lives; 2. Your income will be devoted to paying obscenely profitable insurance companies for services that they will not be willing to render short of a court order; 3. What's left of your earnings must go to the banks for 'credit' services interest rates that you don't need and shouldn't use.
Thursday, October 02, 2008
bailout bill follies
Bailout Bill Follies
by Hunter
Thu Oct 02, 2008 at 01:56:48 PM PDT
The good news, for incensed bill opponents like myself, is that the voices of others besides the Bush administration are finally being at least brought to public attention, though my own expectation is that at this point the Paulson premise -- money for toxic assets, and let the companies get on with being Masters of Their Universe again -- is unstoppable. The Issac more generic premise, that we should not be acquiring the bad assets of these companies, but acquiring equity stakes in them in exchange for taxpayer assistance, is at least being discussed, though it seemingly will still be ignored in favor of ramming through the much, much more corporate-coddling Paulson plan.
And that's absurd, because the equity premise, whether as described by Issac, Krugman, or past historical events, seems a much more logical and less potentially hazardous solution. Those promoting the $700 billion Paulson plan seem to keep mum on a rather central point of the debate -- that it may not even work, and that at the very least it won't do anything to actually improve the economy, but will at best merely keep it teetering on the edge of the abyss. If other plans can accomplish the same for less, than suddenly we've got hundreds of billions of dollars worth of economic stimulus or New Deal-style investment that could be applied, and perhaps a true path forward, as opposed to simply running in place.
I've been trying to figure out what supposed "sweeteners" in the Senate bill might be used by Republican House members to change their positions, and for the life of me, there isn't much there. In usual Senate fashion (voting in the Senate is a gawdawful mess, so bills that do appear tend to be large and, well, inexplicable in scope), the Senate bill is a kitchen-sink approach, lumping together everything from $700 billion to bail out Wall Street's toxic assets to a reduction of the excise tax on wooden arrows intended for children. Wooden arrows intended to be used by children, that is, not wooden arrows pointed at them. Important difference. We're only going to indebt them for their entire lives, here, we're not actually going to impale them as well.
Wavering Republicans seem to be gravitating towards two things to claim that this bill is better than the first one. The first is the raising of the FDIC insurance cap from $100,000 to $250,000. The second is the relaxation of mark-to-market accounting rules, meaning investment houses will be able to "model" what they think their mortgage-related sh-tpiles might be worth in a theoretical market, as opposed to having to report true current market value. That's been a huge one, since (simplified, admittedly) the premise is that this market crisis was not caused by the actual mortgage market getting worse, or the related investments turning bad -- just the onerous rule that says you've got to actually pipe up and say so.
But that's just strange. If we were to believe the Republican objectors, they were objecting to the very principle of bailing out these companies, under the rules of capitalism and the free market and blah blah blah. As it turns out, that wasn't the objection at all, if it can be so easily overcome. And there is absolutely no reason to tie either action specifically to the Paulson plan -- they could be added to any bill. Raising the FDIC cap as separate bill would take no time at all, even for the ponderous Senate, and it probably should be done. Relaxing the mark-to-market standards that are making the corporate books look so very bad probably shouldn't be done, but to some extent it already has been: the SEC loosened those rules on Tuesday, thanks to "intense" pressure by the corporations in question.
So pretending that we need to engage in a no-risk-to-the-companies purchase of toxic assets in order to get any other positive (or negative) solutions passed is silly. Insultingly so, in fact. The question here should not be whether or not you can stuff the bill with enough things to make enough people happy to ram it through, the question should be whether or not it is even the best, least risky, least expensive approach to the problem. And thanks to a stubborn unwillingness by the Bush administration, Paulson, and the Democratic leadership, and aggressive pressure by the institutions most responsible for the current mess and which have the most to gain from a Paulson-style solution, we're not even getting a discussion of the matter.
::
Tags: financial crisis (all tags) :: Previous Tag Versions
Permalink | 284 comments
Comments: Expand Shrink Hide (Always) | Indented Flat (Always)
Daily Kos Help
Here's an interesting take: (26+ / 0-)
Recommended by:Sparhawk, Caelian, ssgbryan, JuliaAnn, worldbeggedyoutovoteKerry, 313to212, chumley, rosabw, Skid, sodalis, raincrow, greenearth, yoduuuh do or do not, dolphin777, jgtidd, JML9999, ghettoMuppet, Mr Rick, Rachel Griffiths, Obama Amabo, josephcast, Qtrubb Bull, Susan from 29, Johnny Q, Jurassic Game Warden, Ham08
This is Abraham Lincoln, then an Illinois state representative, speaking in the legislature on January 11, 1837. He's referring to a dispute between
private shareholders of the Illinois State Bank:
It is an old maxim and a very sound one, that he that
dances should always pay the fiddler. Now, sir, in the
present case, if any gentlemen, whose money is a burden
to them, choose to lead off a dance, I am decidedly opposed
to the people's money being used to pay the fiddler...
all this to settle a question in which the people have no
interest, and about which they care nothing. These
capitalists generally act harmoniously, and in concert,
to fleece the people, and now, that they have got into
a quarrel with themselves, we are called upon to
appropriate the people's money to settle the quarrel.
Sic Transit Gloria Locavore!
by Asinus Asinum Fricat on Thu Oct 02, 2008 at 01:59:17 PM PDT
by Hunter
Thu Oct 02, 2008 at 01:56:48 PM PDT
The good news, for incensed bill opponents like myself, is that the voices of others besides the Bush administration are finally being at least brought to public attention, though my own expectation is that at this point the Paulson premise -- money for toxic assets, and let the companies get on with being Masters of Their Universe again -- is unstoppable. The Issac more generic premise, that we should not be acquiring the bad assets of these companies, but acquiring equity stakes in them in exchange for taxpayer assistance, is at least being discussed, though it seemingly will still be ignored in favor of ramming through the much, much more corporate-coddling Paulson plan.
And that's absurd, because the equity premise, whether as described by Issac, Krugman, or past historical events, seems a much more logical and less potentially hazardous solution. Those promoting the $700 billion Paulson plan seem to keep mum on a rather central point of the debate -- that it may not even work, and that at the very least it won't do anything to actually improve the economy, but will at best merely keep it teetering on the edge of the abyss. If other plans can accomplish the same for less, than suddenly we've got hundreds of billions of dollars worth of economic stimulus or New Deal-style investment that could be applied, and perhaps a true path forward, as opposed to simply running in place.
I've been trying to figure out what supposed "sweeteners" in the Senate bill might be used by Republican House members to change their positions, and for the life of me, there isn't much there. In usual Senate fashion (voting in the Senate is a gawdawful mess, so bills that do appear tend to be large and, well, inexplicable in scope), the Senate bill is a kitchen-sink approach, lumping together everything from $700 billion to bail out Wall Street's toxic assets to a reduction of the excise tax on wooden arrows intended for children. Wooden arrows intended to be used by children, that is, not wooden arrows pointed at them. Important difference. We're only going to indebt them for their entire lives, here, we're not actually going to impale them as well.
Wavering Republicans seem to be gravitating towards two things to claim that this bill is better than the first one. The first is the raising of the FDIC insurance cap from $100,000 to $250,000. The second is the relaxation of mark-to-market accounting rules, meaning investment houses will be able to "model" what they think their mortgage-related sh-tpiles might be worth in a theoretical market, as opposed to having to report true current market value. That's been a huge one, since (simplified, admittedly) the premise is that this market crisis was not caused by the actual mortgage market getting worse, or the related investments turning bad -- just the onerous rule that says you've got to actually pipe up and say so.
But that's just strange. If we were to believe the Republican objectors, they were objecting to the very principle of bailing out these companies, under the rules of capitalism and the free market and blah blah blah. As it turns out, that wasn't the objection at all, if it can be so easily overcome. And there is absolutely no reason to tie either action specifically to the Paulson plan -- they could be added to any bill. Raising the FDIC cap as separate bill would take no time at all, even for the ponderous Senate, and it probably should be done. Relaxing the mark-to-market standards that are making the corporate books look so very bad probably shouldn't be done, but to some extent it already has been: the SEC loosened those rules on Tuesday, thanks to "intense" pressure by the corporations in question.
So pretending that we need to engage in a no-risk-to-the-companies purchase of toxic assets in order to get any other positive (or negative) solutions passed is silly. Insultingly so, in fact. The question here should not be whether or not you can stuff the bill with enough things to make enough people happy to ram it through, the question should be whether or not it is even the best, least risky, least expensive approach to the problem. And thanks to a stubborn unwillingness by the Bush administration, Paulson, and the Democratic leadership, and aggressive pressure by the institutions most responsible for the current mess and which have the most to gain from a Paulson-style solution, we're not even getting a discussion of the matter.
::
Tags: financial crisis (all tags) :: Previous Tag Versions
Permalink | 284 comments
Comments: Expand Shrink Hide (Always) | Indented Flat (Always)
Daily Kos Help
Here's an interesting take: (26+ / 0-)
Recommended by:Sparhawk, Caelian, ssgbryan, JuliaAnn, worldbeggedyoutovoteKerry, 313to212, chumley, rosabw, Skid, sodalis, raincrow, greenearth, yoduuuh do or do not, dolphin777, jgtidd, JML9999, ghettoMuppet, Mr Rick, Rachel Griffiths, Obama Amabo, josephcast, Qtrubb Bull, Susan from 29, Johnny Q, Jurassic Game Warden, Ham08
This is Abraham Lincoln, then an Illinois state representative, speaking in the legislature on January 11, 1837. He's referring to a dispute between
private shareholders of the Illinois State Bank:
It is an old maxim and a very sound one, that he that
dances should always pay the fiddler. Now, sir, in the
present case, if any gentlemen, whose money is a burden
to them, choose to lead off a dance, I am decidedly opposed
to the people's money being used to pay the fiddler...
all this to settle a question in which the people have no
interest, and about which they care nothing. These
capitalists generally act harmoniously, and in concert,
to fleece the people, and now, that they have got into
a quarrel with themselves, we are called upon to
appropriate the people's money to settle the quarrel.
Sic Transit Gloria Locavore!
by Asinus Asinum Fricat on Thu Oct 02, 2008 at 01:59:17 PM PDT
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
