Glad I aint a GOPer
Submitted by staff on Wed, 05/03/2006 - 12:33pm.
A few folks are discussing this rant by Bizzyblog. I agree with some of the sentiments. I wrote that it did feel like blackmail in some of these races, especially top of the ticket.
I can understand why someone on the right feels like that about their party. Those with any intellectual honesty know they have been sold down the river with a bill of goods, by a party hijacked by religious extremists and political panderers.
Yeah I am pissed Hackett was shoved out of the race. I'll be even more pissed when Brown loses to DeWine. I am disappointed that Subodh didn't make it, but Marc Dann despite some faults is a guy I can support, so too is Ted Strickland. Rich Cordray is a great guy and Brunner will make an excellent SoS and Sykes wounldn't have missed the BWC scandal like Betty did.
But where I have the most excitement is in people like Bob Shamansky, Stephanie Studebaker, STJ, Tim Ryan, Zack Space, Richard Sieferd in fact almost all the congressional candidates. These people I believe do represent me and the majority of my positions and they are fighters, win or lose. I can dig that.
I think when it is all said and done the Republican grass roots rank and file have a lot more to be upset and pessimistic about than me.
So the bottom line for me is if Ted can make amends with COPE as he promises and Marc Dann fights as hard and politically smart against Betty as he has during coingate I'm down with both of them.
The only real candidate I don't have any time for is Sherrod Brown. He has given nothing and taken away too much. Six months is a long time - but the giving better start yesterday.
Glad I aint a GOPer.
Thanks
Submitted by staff on Wed, 05/03/2006 - 1:22pm.
the only reason i omitted him is because i know zero about him. Obviously we are going to have to correct that.
Bill O'Neill
Submitted by redenemy on Wed, 05/03/2006 - 1:49pm.
Deserves a lot more attention... Come on kids.. This guy is cool...
The Next Jim Parker...
Submitted by redenemy on Wed, 05/03/2006 - 1:50pm.
Bill O'Neill is the next Jim Parker... Alan Harvard, start your keyboard...
He seems like a great guy.
Submitted by Mr. Common Sense on Wed, 05/03/2006 - 2:10pm.
But with his views, he'd be more appropriate in the legislature than on the bench.
You mean..
Submitted by redenemy on Wed, 05/03/2006 - 2:22pm.
"that money and judges don't mix"? yeah, that's crazy... Clearly shouldn't be a judge.
Not that line, jackass.
Submitted by Mr. Common Sense on Wed, 05/03/2006 - 2:36pm.
Have you ever heard him speak? He doesn't understand the limitations that should bind a member of the judiciary.
I agree with many of his views, but it is his type of judicial ideology that made the Ohio Supreme Court a laughingstock for many, many years. The Court often issued decisions that fell wildly outside of the bounds within which a responsible member of the judiciary should stay. Judges shouldn't legislate. Ever. It's not in their job descriptions.
Clear enough for you?
touchy, touchy
Submitted by redenemy on Wed, 05/03/2006 - 2:43pm.
can't a body make a joke around here? Yes, I've heard him speak. I think he's great. He's got experience, and as far as the legislating thing, I don't know what you want to call it, but yeah, he's going to stand and fight for his views... if that makes you a laughing stock, well, the Dems could use a lot more of it..
judges aren't supposed
Submitted by RMC2000 on Wed, 05/03/2006 - 2:47pm.
to fight for their views. they are supposed to interpret the law. if they do otherwise, that entire separation of powers thing sort of goes to hell.
typical Dems...
Submitted by redenemy on Wed, 05/03/2006 - 2:55pm.
Complaining that someone isn't following the rules...Look, I'm tired of playing with the gloves on, if the Republicans aren't going to play fair, I'm all about returning the favor to save our jobs, schools, choice, our future...
Me too...
Submitted by redenemy on Wed, 05/03/2006 - 3:05pm.
and that is why I like this guy... He's said f--- you to the party, generally says and does the things that people don't like to hear (personal fav. "the ohio legislature had better pack thier toothbrushes, becuase if I win I'm going to make them stay overnight untill they solve the school funding f--- up they've created"), and cares more about fixing the situation than playing the game. How is that bad?
it's not bad,
Submitted by RMC2000 on Wed, 05/03/2006 - 3:12pm.
but you can't fix that problem from the bench. how on earth could he make them stay there? the court has already ruled that it's unconstitutional. that's all they can do under the law. a legislator, on the other hand, could force them to stay and fix the problem. there are ways to solve ohio's problems...i just prefer that the right (and legal) methods are employed to effect those solutions.
Forgive me..
Submitted by redenemy on Wed, 05/03/2006 - 3:19pm.
I'm still working through that part of 6th grade civics. That said, we don't have the legislators to do that right now, and we still won't at the end of 2006 (sorry folks, ain't gonna happen), so I'll settle for a Judge that would finally make the legislator do something. If I remember right from DeRolph (1213518) the Judges can order sessions and can mandate the implimentation of a plan. If O'Neill will force this issue, he will most certainly have my vote...
you're forgiven
Submitted by RMC2000 on Wed, 05/03/2006 - 3:27pm.
and if the court actually granted itself the power to dictate that the legislature pass a specific plan, it's repulsive. can they also grant themselves the power to enforce the law? why not just do away with the legislature and the executive and let the judges run the state? oh, wait, they're all republicans too. the system and the rule of law are all important in our democracy. i can't support a deviation from that rule of law, no matter how admirable the cause.
missing the forest
Submitted by redenemy on Wed, 05/03/2006 - 3:33pm.
For the record, I'm yet to see an example from anyone where Judge O'Neill has said that he's going to legislate from the bench... so while this is all interesting, I think we should have some examples here. Anyone?
"the ohio legislature had better
Submitted by RMC2000 on Wed, 05/03/2006 - 3:36pm.
"the ohio legislature had better pack thier toothbrushes, becuase if I win I'm going to make them stay overnight untill they solve the school funding f--- up they've created"
i would love to see how that happens within the confines of our constitution
Forget much?
Submitted by Mr. Common Sense on Wed, 05/03/2006 - 3:36pm.
" . . . 'the ohio legislature had better pack thier toothbrushes, becuase if I win I'm going to make them stay overnight untill they solve the school funding f--- up they've created') . . . "
You just wrote that, didn't you? You were kind enough to give the example. Despite what the Court wrote in the DeRolph opinion, that would be legislating.
Yeah, that was a great joke.
Submitted by Mr. Common Sense on Wed, 05/03/2006 - 3:06pm.
My wife likes Jack Benny, but I like your brand of humor better.
And lest you forget, prior to 2006, the Dems were a laughingstock. A judge can "stand and fight for his views," but he can't legislate. That's fifth grade Civics class. Are you still in fourth grade?
That was a joke.
Harping
Submitted by Jill on Wed, 05/03/2006 - 4:43pm.
O'Neill supports Intelligent Design being taught alongside evolution. NOT what I want in a judge. Cannot vote for him unless his opponent has even more strikes against him. Better go check that Christian Coalition thingy...;)
Yep.
Submitted by Muffet on Wed, 05/03/2006 - 4:59pm.
This is way too much for me, too. We need an intellignet supreme court, not an intelligently designed one.
I hear ya
Submitted by staff on Wed, 05/03/2006 - 5:04pm.
My only acid test at this point though is - is he a corporate shill ? Whoever is the least corpratist gets my vote.
This is also the point when
Submitted by Jill on Wed, 05/03/2006 - 7:30pm.
This is also the point when I start really trying to understand how not voting for either candidate works. Who does it help? I can never get the logic on it. And, for some reason, I also just hate the idea of not casting a vote at all in anything.
Abstentions
Submitted by staff on Wed, 05/03/2006 - 7:45pm.
are part of Democracy.
Suppose you were presented with a choice of Da Kaiser (D) and Blackell (R) for Gov who would you vote for ?
You know, I don't know.  My
Submitted by Jill on Wed, 05/03/2006 - 8:50pm.
You know, I don't know. My first instinct would be defensive: vote for whomever will keep my worst nightmare from becoming a reality.
But honestly, Russell, if I lived in a state where those were my two choices for gov in the fall, I would be moving. No rhetoric there. I will not pour my heart, time, effort, brains, children's futures and dollar after dollar into a state populated by people who want to choose between those two individuals. Such a choice would be completely and utterly out of sync with everything I believe and hope for. In addition, I simply do not trust either one.
In parenting, as you probably know, and I've said this before, maybe one parent handles a tight schedule one way and let's the kids have fast food one night, maybe the other parent believes that's wrong. However, not for one minute does either parent ever believe that the other one would do anything - would make any decision, that would actually harm the child. It just might not be the same decision that he or she might make.
I feel that way about certain candidates, Dems and Reps, who I could live with, even if I didn't support them with votes or anything else.
But when it comes to Blackwell and someone who has been described as Keiser has been, I actually can see them doing harm. So I have no trust and I would beat it out of here.
He did this wild speech
Submitted by Ohio2nd on Wed, 05/03/2006 - 2:21pm.
at the Warren County Dems about the importance of love in the judiciary. I loved it but Mrs. Editor thought he was stone cold crazy. Interestingly enough our same reactions to Jim Parker.
Are You Sure That Wasn't AJ Wagner?
Submitted by Ohio2006 on Wed, 05/03/2006 - 7:42pm.
We're talking about Bill O'Neill here, I believe, but it was A.J. Wagner who did this bizarre "Importance of Love" thing at a candidates forum I went to in Cleveland. Strangest thing I ever heard from a judge, although in 1980 I heard then-N.Y.C. City Council President Carole Bellamy give a talk at my law school called "The Politics of Love."
(Ooops ... did I just leak my age?)
I like narratives.....
Submitted by modernesquire on Wed, 05/03/2006 - 1:59pm.
And the narrative around the GOP is a lot of nervousness about how divided the Blackwell-Petro primary has caused. Just read the comments at Right Angle Blog. Believe it or not, they actually believe that the results show what a big tent the party has because moderates like DeWine and Montgomery won. Bull.
The difference between Jennette Bradley and DeWine/Montgomery that everyone seems to miss is that this was Bradley's first statewide campaign. Think about it, even though she's been Lt. Gov. and Treasurer, she's never run statewide before.
Her fundraising was much better than her opponent, but her campaign organization was much weaker than DeWine and Montgomery. If DeWine hadn't run his "I heart kids" ad and campaigned as he did, he could have been just like Bradley. Montgomery had over a $1M in the bank. Bradley didn't even raise half that.
The old guard survived because they had better campaign organizations staffed with statewide campaign veterans.
This Republican primary has exposed a gaping and growing schism between two wings of the party. The "be conservative and unite" crowd at RAB is demanding loyalty like a conquering army would demand it. It's not going to work.
A see more hand wringing that harn holding among the GOP today, and I don't any sign yet that the picture is going to change much soon.
I can't add much
Submitted by AmberCat on Wed, 05/03/2006 - 7:42pm.
to wehat you said, staff. The two candidates I worked hardest for, Subodh, and Julian Rogers, both lost big. Both were running for the first time. I just know Julian will be back. But both had opponents I have no problem supporting, and I may even find myself doing a little work for Julian's opponent, Barbara Boyd, because her Republican opponent is the Rev. Jimmie "Homophobes R US" Hicks, this disitrct's answer to Kenny Taftwell. I think Brunner and Sykes and Cordray can kick some serious ass and Strickland is a cool customer. I would never underestimate him.
But Sherrod....oh, God, what can you say? I would like to think that a complete unknown wacko who did not even run a campaign getting more than 20% of the vote would wake him up to the need for changes. I've heard a dozen contradictory theories today as to WHY Keiser did so well, but ultimately that's less important than the fact that people just arern't getting excited about Sherrod Brown. And unless he starts reaching out — like, yesterday — they won't.
Lew Katz