What they do
Poor Merkley. First he's got to parade around with a Skoal can in his pocket, and now he's got to deal with traitors:
With enemies like this pair, John McCain doesn't need friends. [Via BlueOregon.]
Poor Merkley. First he's got to parade around with a Skoal can in his pocket, and now he's got to deal with traitors:
With enemies like this pair, John McCain doesn't need friends. [Via BlueOregon.]
Comments (22)
Such BS! I watch very little TV but I saw this ad recently and I was absolutely appalled. I really like Sen. Gordly but I stood up (literally - from where I was on the couch watching golf) and said, "Damn it, Avel, what the hell are you doing?!?" when I saw this. UGH!
Posted by ellie | June 14, 2008 11:05 PM
Furse and Gordley have been wackos since day one. They exhibit the lack of good and common sense. These two are not mavin's, in fact their terms in office were both hyperbolic and flummoxing, and yet the DUM voters gave them a free ride.
Posted by KISS | June 15, 2008 6:59 AM
Oh my,,, a couple typical Democrat staples who never had any qualifications to be elected leaders sway from their only asset, blindly supporting other democrats, and they're traitors.
Love it.
Funny thing is there are many clones of these two in public office right now. From the CoP to the legislature they are the model that produces Oregon's dreamers and CO2aphobes.
Posted by Howard | June 15, 2008 8:37 AM
Checks and balances are good. I expect and hope that we will have a Democratic President, House, and Senate. To avoid foolish excesses from one party, however, it is important to have some Republicans in the Senate. As a life-long registered Democrat, I will vote for Gordon Smith.
Posted by Joel | June 15, 2008 9:14 AM
As a lifelong observer of human nature, I will consider your vote foolish.
Posted by Jack Bog | June 15, 2008 11:17 AM
Perhaps they saw a glimpse of future pork.
Posted by Bark Munster | June 15, 2008 11:33 AM
If memory is correct Furse was involved with "Democrats For Hatfield" when Harry Lonsdale had a chance of defeating Hatfield.
And I recall former Oregon (3rd District) Congresswoman Edith Green endorsed and worked for Nixon's re-election over George McGovern.
Posted by paul | June 15, 2008 11:57 AM
Edith Green, another old bone from the crypt of Goldschmidt
Posted by KISS | June 15, 2008 12:39 PM
Yo, Jack,
Here is an example of what my Democrats will pass next year unless there are 41 Republicans in the Senate. Under current law, if people may want a union, the NRLB runs an election with a secret ballot. No one knows how anyone votes. The law next year will change so that the union, if it gets enough signed cards, can skip the secret-ballot election. That is more like Stalin that American democracy. Bush took away some of our freedoms, and my Democrats will talk away some more (unless there is a check).
Posted by Joel | June 15, 2008 4:02 PM
After all the individual freedoms that Cheney and the Chimp have destroyed, I'm really not going to sweat too much over the corporate "freedoms" that the Democrats will take away. If it's all that bad, I'm sure Clarence Thomas and Tony Scalia will fix it for you.
Posted by Jack Bog | June 15, 2008 4:30 PM
Jack,
I am not worried about the corporate freedom. It is the people who work for a living who lose the right to have a secret vote. We need to get freedoms back, not lose more.
Posted by Joel | June 15, 2008 4:41 PM
Let's not forget Les Aucoi's support for Hatfield
Posted by demo | June 15, 2008 5:36 PM
I was wondering when you were going to post this. My mouth was agape the first time I saw it. I kept thinking of you, Jack, and the "Can you spare it?" remark about Wyden.
Good Lord, what the hell? Seriously?
p.s. thank you Joel for the explanation about those grating anti-union ads.
Posted by Ms. Contrarian | June 15, 2008 6:24 PM
Jack, can you please list individually each and every one of the (or even any?) "individual freedoms that Cheney and the Chimp have destroyed"? I can't think of any of my own that have been destroyed and I can't imagine our lives are that much different. Oh yeah....I can no longer talk on the phone to a suspected terrorist OVER SEAS without the government listening in. Sorry Osama and Omar, I won't be calling as frequently.....my life is ruined.
Posted by butch | June 15, 2008 8:19 PM
Dutch,
I can give you two. First, an FBI agent can give a recordkeeper a letter demanding infomation about you. No judge; no court order. THE LETTER WILL TELL THE RECORDKEEPER THAT HE/SHE WILL GO TO JAIL IF HE/SHE SPEAKS TO YOU ABOUT IT. I think that steps on my right to speak.
Second, suppose there is a American who wants to open a bank account. Suppose the American has no driver's license (maybe the American is 90 years old). THAT AMERICAN CANNOT OPEN AN ACCOUNT IN ANY FINANCIAL INSTTTUION IN THE USA WITHOUT SOMEHOW GETTING A GOVERNEMENT ISSUED PICUTRE ID. Big brother is watching.
Those are two that I have run into. I guess others involve wiretapping without any court order.
Keeping in mind how the info. may be used. The FBI used info. against Martin Luther King. Hillary Clinton called for FBI files on hundreds of Republicans. The FBI gave them to her.
Posted by Joel | June 15, 2008 8:49 PM
How about my right not be arrested and taken to some God-forsaken hellhole in Cuba? That seems to have been a pretty tough call for Dick Cheney.
Posted by Jack Bog | June 15, 2008 11:11 PM
"Edith Green, another old bone from the crypt of Goldschmidt."
Ms. Green, a 5th grade teacher in '47, would have said "Do your homework before you come to class"
Posted by David E Gilmore | June 16, 2008 8:28 AM
Joel: you don't need a drivers license, you need a SSN. If you're Mexican you just need a matricula card.
Posted by Richard/s | June 16, 2008 8:33 AM
Richard,
I wish you were right. You used to be right. To open an account now, you need a SSN AND A GOVERNMENT PICTURE ID. They changed the law.
Posted by Joel | June 16, 2008 9:02 AM
Joel,
A drivers license isn't the only government issued picture ID. All states have residence cards, and passports are another option.
Jack,
You are still entitled to the protection of habeas corpus......even if you are an alien terrorist now it seems....
Posted by butch | June 16, 2008 9:45 AM
Yeah, I'm sure the guys on the secret prison ships will forward your habeas petition via Fed Ex.
Posted by Jack Bog | June 16, 2008 9:53 AM
Well, thanks to the SCOTUS's latest, detaining terrorists without trial will cease to be a problem......because we'll no longer have any. I expect that now when we capture a terrorist, rather than being detained by our military, we will follow the Clinton model and have them immediately rendered to one of our allies such as Egypt, Saudi Arabia, or Iraq for a 'proper' interrogation.
Posted by butch | June 16, 2008 10:24 AM