| 0 |
Subject: 2010 Mid Terms
Posted by: Nuclear Gophers
- [7115138] Wed, Jan 13, 2010, 17:43
With a big race this Tuesday, thought it would be a good time to get responses on it and the Mid Terms. I see the schoolyard antics were working last night in DC. |
Only the 50 most recent replies are currently shown. Click on this text to display hidden posts as well.
[Lengthy or complex threads may require a slight delay before updating.] |
| 141 | Boldwin
ID: 26451820
Thu, Jan 21, 2010, 08:26
|
Hey, I'm not even a Republican. John Stewart is not in minimize mode.
|
| 146 | Nuclear Gophers
ID: 7115138
Fri, Jan 22, 2010, 16:23
|
140-Your absolutely right. I am now a "Bob Beck" republican. The hell with all the other Republicans. I am going for now on vote what is in the best interest of me. He is against the health care and cap and trade. Oh and by the way how can you support a health care bill that does not insure 23 million people. If you really care about people the way you say you do, you would be against it also. But you really dont care about them do you?
|
| 147 | DWetzel
ID: 278201415
Fri, Jan 22, 2010, 17:14
|
"Oh and by the way how can you support a health care bill that does not insure 23 million people. If you really care about people the way you say you do, you would be against it also. But you really dont care about them do you?"
This is a really stupid rhetorical argument NG, and I think you know better than to use it.
Obviously it would be better to have 0 uninsured than 23 million. But if we end up with 23 million instead of 46 million (I'm just pulling that number out of the air), are you saying it's not worth doing?
If you wanted to sent 100,000 troops to Iraq, and you were only allowed to send 80,000, would you throw up your arms and say "oh, well, forget the whole thing then?" If you wanted taxes reduced by 20% and you could only get a 15% tax reduction passed through the Senate, would you say "no thanks, keep that 15%, IT'S 20% OR NOTHING!"
|
| 148 | Nuclear Gophers
ID: 7115138
Sun, Jan 24, 2010, 08:35
|
Obviously it would be better to have 0 uninsured than 23 million. But if we end up with 23 million instead of 46 million (I'm just pulling that number out of the air), are you saying it's not worth doing? I think after being told that every American would be cover under the health bill, I could use my stupid rhetorical argument. Obviously you dont mind being lied to, so Obama can get what he wants, but this time he got his hand caught in the cookie jar. People dont like being lied to.
|
| 149 | biliruben
ID: 16105237
Sun, Jan 24, 2010, 08:47
|
It's not what Obama wants. It's what our country desperately needs.
And it would best we have any hope of getting for a long, long time.
Y'all better hope you didn't inherit any expensive diseases.
|
| 150 | Mith
ID: 43914286
Sun, Jan 24, 2010, 08:59
|
he got his hand caught in the cookie jar
Does that actually mean anything?
|
| 151 | Mith
ID: 43914286
Sun, Jan 24, 2010, 09:00
|
People dont like being lied to.
Failure to accomplish what you set out to do - due in large part to the best efforts of a hostile oppposition - is not lying, it's failing. Is that really so confusing?
|
| 152 | Nuclear Gophers
ID: 7115138
Sun, Jan 24, 2010, 11:38
|
Then hes a failure. He had the majority, so the hostile opposition was the democrats. Thanks for the explanation, it doesnt seem so confusing now.
|
| 153 | Nuclear Gophers
ID: 7115138
Sun, Jan 24, 2010, 11:49
|
Now hes forced to work with the republicams if he really wants to get any thing done. If not hes a lame duck. With the bloodbath in November coming he has no choice.
|
| 154 | Perm Dude
ID: 5510572522
Sun, Jan 24, 2010, 12:32
|
I think it is a little ironic that the Rights' latest meme on health care is that it took so long and doesn't cover everyone. The reason it took so long is that the Democrats tried for months to get Republicans on board to at least engage with them on the issue. They could have passed a far more liberal bill in the late summer but tried to get at least some bipartisan ideas.
We should pass the bill because it saves a boatload of money in Medicare costs. If, as is the current GOP talking point, the number of uninsured don't matter but deficits do then the Right should be foursquare behind the Senate bill. But I suspect that current GOP policy is no longer driven by anything other than being against whatever Democrats propose.
He had the majority,
Still does. Not to put too fine a point on it.
What will happen from here on out is that the Democrats will just shed the attempts at bipartisanship that gummed up the works in the past. Bipartisanship only works when people talk in good faith (and the GOP has demonstrated it has no intention of talking with Democrats. On anything). The GOP will be left with the hope that the country will still be in the tank and that they can convince the country that they have a host of ideas they were unwilling to share before about how to get the country on its feet.
|
| 155 | Mith
ID: 43914286
Sun, Jan 24, 2010, 12:57
|
He had the majority, so the hostile opposition was the democrats.
No, certain congressional Dems were grandstanding opportunists. Chuck Grassley and the GOP were the obstructionist, hostile opposition.
|
| 156 | Nuclear Gophers
ID: 7115138
Sun, Jan 24, 2010, 13:11
|
Thats laughable. Your biggest problem were the progressives in the party. It was all democratic in-fighting. Its easy to blame the other party. But the Dems should take a look in the mirror and take care of the "hostile opposition" in their own party. Try working with the Progressives first, then move on with the other party.
|
| 157 | biliruben
ID: 16105237
Sun, Jan 24, 2010, 13:13
|
The progressive agenda was largely ignored, yet they went along anyway. I'm not sure we are living in the same country.
|
| 158 | Perm Dude
ID: 5510572522
Sun, Jan 24, 2010, 13:36
|
bili is exactly right. The back and forth with Snowe and others (who were happy to bask in bipartisan love to help them with their voters back home) took all the time. Progressives grumbled but are far more pragmatic about health care than conservatives. And it shows in how they vote.
|
| 159 | Nuclear Gophers
ID: 7115138
Sun, Jan 24, 2010, 15:21
|
lol- if thats the case why were there negotiations after the Senate passed their bill. The progressives more htan grumbled. They pussy footed around until the people of Mass told the congress what the people of America really thought of the bill. You only have yourselves to blame. The revolution has started. It will continue in November. The power of the vote. Dont under estimate the American people, they are smarter than what you Dems think. How that Hope and Change working for you. HMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM
|
| 160 | Tree
ID: 248472317
Sun, Jan 24, 2010, 15:54
|
The revolution has started. It will continue in November. The power of the vote. Dont under estimate the American people, they are smarter than what you Dems think. How that Hope and Change working for you. HMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM
this is the sort of thing i'm seeing more and more of, after the Massachusetts election.
this odd sort of footballesque "OH HELL YEA!! WE ARE ON THE MOVE!! IN YOUR FACE!" kind of taunting.
i feel bad for those who think the loss of an ineffective politician who ran a bad campaign in a state that has no problem electing Republicans (despite all those "bluest of blue" state comments that are off the mark) is some sort of massive indicator of broad-sweeping change.
i also feel bad for those who think that Senator Brown is going to be some sort of harbinger of sweeping Conservative change.
He is likely going to be the most liberal senator. And he's more liberal that some of the Democrats.
|
| 161 | Boldwin
ID: 26451820
Sun, Jan 24, 2010, 16:18
|
"I>But the Dems should take a look in the mirror and take care of the "hostile opposition" in their own party. Try working with the Progressives first, then move on with the other party. - NG The progressives are in the driver's seat in that party. Anyone else in that party wears a choker chain and is blue in the face from being dragged around and stifled. The dem majority is quite illusory in that their majorities hinge on blue dog dems who are only dems because they are in conservative states with historically strong Dem party machines that carry forward from decades past when there was an entirely different dem party.
|
| 162 | Tree
ID: 248472317
Sun, Jan 24, 2010, 17:22
|
decades past when there was an entirely different dem party.
i don't know what concept of this comment made me chuckle more. The apparent refusal to acknowledge that time marches on and things change, or the comment coming from someone who advocates an entirely different republican party than the one the one that was around for much of the last 30 years.
|
| 163 | Pancho Villa
ID: 29118157
Sun, Jan 24, 2010, 17:39
|
The dem majority is quite illusory in that their majorities hinge on blue dog dems who are only dems because they are in conservative states with historically strong Dem party machines that carry forward from decades past when there was an entirely different dem party.
There are 32 Blue Dog Democrats. If every one were subtracted, the House would still hold a Democratic majority(currently 256 Dem - 178 Repub).
Of the 32 Blue Dogs, more than half(19) come from states that are not considered conservative, and I'm not even counting North and South Dakota, Kansas, and North Carolina, which went Obama in 2008.
link
So the word illusory does fit here, in that your sentence defines it perfectly.
|
| 164 | walk
ID: 44111268
Sun, Jan 24, 2010, 19:04
|
NYT: GOP seeks to widen field in fall elections
I do fear a shift towards republicans in the Fall, as when time are bad, and they are bad now, the party in power tends to lose. Just is. Not saying that the Dems are the cause of our bad times, 8 years of Bush & Cheney had a lot more to do with it, but outside of another huge stim package, which will be politicaly untenable, or some other miracle, the jobless rate will continue to be poor, and our deficit will continue to grow with Afghanistan and Iraq costs (I wish Obama would get out of Afghanistan), I think the Dems are going to take a big hit this Fall. It would be great if the republicans won with some intelligencia and not some Palin-like boobs. We have some time to see who gets put up.
|
| 165 | Perm Dude
ID: 5510572522
Sun, Jan 24, 2010, 19:45
|
The revolution has started
If electing a pro-health care, pro-choice Republican in Massachusetts is an indication of the revolution than I'm not sure that those saying this are learning very many of the lessons of the election. Does this mean a rush to elect moderate Republicans?
This will be an all-or-nothing election in the fall. Dems will win big (in which case the Republicans really will be the martyrs they insist they are right now) or Republicans will storm back (in which case we'll have gridlock, since Republicans have no idea of how to play well with others).
I certainly welcome the Republicans doubling down. It means that the Democrats will push through whatever they can this year (no more overtures at bipartisanship with a GOP who slaps their hand every time it is given out). And it means that Obama will be moving into election mode. And I would be pleased to see the
GOP (again) underestimate Obama on the election trail.
|
| 166 | Boldwin
ID: 26451820
Sun, Jan 24, 2010, 21:54
|
Well that is a scary thot because the Dems in the admin are said to be in double-down mode and campaigning is the one thing Obama can actually do well.
|
| 167 | Frick
ID: 9103036
Mon, Jan 25, 2010, 08:22
|
PD, do you have a site where you can look at voting records by party?
I'm just curious if voting patterns are different now then they have been for the last 10-20 years.
|
| 168 | Mith
ID: 43914286
Mon, Jan 25, 2010, 09:01
|
govtrack.us.
|
| 169 | Perm Dude
ID: 5510572522
Mon, Jan 25, 2010, 12:24
|
Somewhat related, here's a great article on the filibuster with links to other great articles.
|
| 170 | Tree, on lunch
ID: 570552512
Mon, Jan 25, 2010, 13:55
|
since Republicans have no idea of how to play well with others
i think to say that ALL Republicans have no idea is a generalization.
i think the fear mongering by the far Right of the party has caused many more moderate Republicans to live in a bit of fear to think for themselves or buck that small, but vocally obnoxious minority.
We saw it in the presidential campaign, when McCain tried to woo the radical Right by altering his positions a bit in an effort to appeal to them.
obviously, that failed miserably.
|
| 171 | Perm Dude
ID: 5510572522
Tue, Jan 26, 2010, 13:28
|
Mike Pence not running against Bayh in Indiana. This, I think, is a blow to the GOP. Bayh was not polling well against Pence, who has developed a well-earned reputation as a firebrand conservative. Bayh is polling well against the only other declared Indiana candidate (John Hostettler).
In Pence's announcement, this is just hooey, intended to present a false bravado: I also am staying because I believe we will win back the majority in the House of Representatives in 2010, and I am excited to be a part of it
|
| 172 | Frick
ID: 9103036
Tue, Jan 26, 2010, 13:41
|
I live in Indiana and I don't see either candidate making a serious run against Bayh. I would say the same of a Democrat running against Luger.
|
| 173 | Nuclear Gophers
ID: 7115138
Tue, Jan 26, 2010, 16:33
|
160-
1-Hes against health care front and center in the most liberal state
2-Hes against cap and trade to trim carbon emissions
3-He ran against same sex marriage in his State Senate run for the office
4-Hes for lower taxes to encourage Economic growth
5-Supports the 2nd amendment
That doesnt sound liberal to me. It seems to me the Liberals are trying to define what a conservative is. If it is liberal, maybe your in the wrong party. With those views he campaigned on, I will cheer him on, (I like to use the Hockeyesque approach) as far as he wants to go.
|
| 174 | Perm Dude
ID: 5510572522
Tue, Jan 26, 2010, 16:42
|
He is, by far, the most liberal Republican in the Senate (based upon his own voting records). This isn't defining what a conservative is--this is taking how he voted and noting how that lines up with others in the Senate.
|
| 175 | Nuclear Gophers
ID: 7115138
Tue, Jan 26, 2010, 18:02
|
Im sitting here and my chair started to spin by itself.
|
| 176 | Perm Dude
ID: 5510572522
Tue, Jan 26, 2010, 18:19
|
You're right: a pro-choice guy from Massachusetts isn't liberal at all.
Part of the problem here is that there seems to be no belief that a guy can be both "liberal" or even "moderate" and "Republican." By and large the most liberal members of the GOP are from the Northeast, however.
Is he a "liberal" in the sense of, say, Franken? No. But he'll be the most liberal member of the GOP by far.
To expect anything else from Massachusetts could only come from a psychic break with reality.
|
| 177 | Mith
ID: 43914286
Tue, Jan 26, 2010, 19:01
|
The guy was all for Romneycare, which is a notably more extensive system than the Senate bill he killed. He still defends it today.
I don't see how anyone could read the explanation he gave Cavuto in post 22 and think he's an economic conservative. He said he doesn't like the federal plan because MA residents don't need it - because they already had a big fancy expensive healthcare overhaul in their state -- with a mandate, no less --- that he helped put there.
|
| 178 | Nuclear Gophers
ID: 7115138
Tue, Jan 26, 2010, 19:33
|
173=
6-No miranda rights for terrorist
|
| 179 | Seattle Zen
ID: 1410391215
Tue, Jan 26, 2010, 19:59
|
6-No miranda rights for terrorist
I'd love conservatives point to any elected official who maintains that our laws require that people accused of international terrorist acts are subject to Arizona v. Miranda. Just one. It's such a red herring. Makes for good TV, but the claim that Democrats believe it is false.
|
| 180 | Wilmer McLean
ID: 806275
Wed, Jan 27, 2010, 06:07
|
Boehner claims House Republicans dominate Twitter, YouTube and other social media in Congress -- PolitiFact.com (True)
|
| 181 | Tree
ID: 248472317
Wed, Jan 27, 2010, 07:25
|
as someone who dabbles in social media to make a few extra bucks on the side, i'm not surprised by post 180.
There's little question to me that the Republicans have done a better job of getting their message out, and they have a better PR machine, and in 2010, Social Media is a big part of it.
despite the technology. in a way, it's a Populist way to get your message out. More and more people are online, and more and more people are actively involved with Social Networking.
I've said it here before - if you're not using it to spread the message you might want to share, you're going to be let behind.
More than the election in Masschusetts, this bit of information is more worrisome to me.
|
| 182 | Nuclear Gophers
ID: 7115138
Thu, Feb 04, 2010, 21:20
|
Home > News > Nation/World Vulnerable Dems seek distance from Obama
Topics
Kennedy Space Center
Family
Kirsten Gillibrand
See more topics »
XBudgets and Budgeting
Satellite Technology
NASA
Democratic Party
Blanche Lincoln
Barack Obama
Arlen Specter
Space Programs
Medical Services
Barbara Boxer
Farms Janet Hook and Christi Parsons
Washington DC Bureau
6:32 p.m. EST, February 3, 2010
E-mail Print Share Text Size
As Congress begins picking through President Obama's vast election year budget, many Democratic incumbents and candidates seem to be finding something they love to campaign against.
A Democratic Senate candidate in Missouri denounced the budget's sky-high deficit. A Florida Democrat whose district includes the Kennedy Space Center hit the roof over NASA budget cuts. And an endangered Senate Democrat denounced proposed cuts in farm subsidies.
A headline on the 2010 campaign website of Sen. Blanche Lincoln (D-Ark.), blares her opposition to Obama's farm budget: ``Blanche stands up for Arkansas farm families,'' it says.
Heading into an election season in which Republicans are trying to tie Democrats to Obama's unpopular policies, Obama's budget gives his fellow Democrats an unlikely campaign tool a catalogue of ways to establish their distance from controversial aspects of his administration.
It is a time-tested campaign tactic for politicians to declare their independence of party leaders. But the tactic is particularly important for Democrats this year, because their party dominates Washington, and being an insider is a political liability in an anti-incumbent climate.
Underscoring that dynamic, Obama held a question-and-answer session with Senate Democrats on Wednesday, drawing polite challenges from a procession of incumbents up for reelection.
Sen. Arlen Specter (D-Pa.), a recent party-switcher, questioned trade policies battering the steel industry. Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.) asked about health care for first responders involved in the Sept. 11attack. The message from Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-Ca.): ``California is hurting.''
All that underscores a potential gap between Obama's governing agenda and congressional Democrats' political interest in the election. While Democrats on the ballot encounter stiff headwinds, Obama is asking them look at the big picture on the budget, take on tough issues, and let the politics take care of themselves.
``If anybody's searching for a lesson from Massachusetts, I promise you, the answer is not to do nothing," Obama told the Senate Democrats. "We've got to finish the job on health care. We've got to finish the job on financial regulatory reform. We've got to finish the job, even though it's hard."
Since his State of the Union address last week, Obama has offered a spirited defense of his agenda, his feisty demeanor an implicit promise of support for those Democrats who work with him. At a time when some might be thinking about parting ways with his agenda, Obama is pressing his case that now is not the time to abandon the ideals that swept him into office.
While Democrats agree with Obama's broad goals, they do not agree with all it takes to achieve them especially in his budget, which makes little short-term progress in deficit reduction yet calls for spending cuts in many programs.
Lincoln is a dedicated proponent of fiscal responsibility. But she sharply denounced the cuts in farm subsidies that are so important to her state. That is not only good constituent service, but good 2010 politics in a state that voted heavily against Obama in the 2008 election.
Wednesday's meeting with Obama gave Lincoln a televised opportunity to challenge Obama on a broader question. As one of eight Democrats hand-picked by party leaders to question the president, all but one up for re-election this year, Lincoln urged Obama to ``to push back against people in our own party that want extremes.''
Then, in short order, her campaign website featured a news report: ``Lincoln challenges Obama on liberal `extremes.'"
Elsewhere around the country, Rep. Suzanne Kosmas a freshman Democrat from a Republican leaning part of Florida minced no words in complaining about Obama's proposed cuts to the NASA budget. The space industry is one of the largest employers in her district.
``The president's proposal lacks a bold vision for space exploration and begs for the type of leadership that he has described as critical for inspiring innovation for the 21st century,'' said Kosmas.
In the swing state of Missouri, Democratic Senate candidate Robin Carnahan wasted no time this week denouncing Obama's budget as profligate.
``I'm disappointed in the president's budget recommendation,'' she said. ``Missouri families have to balance their checkbooks and our government is no different.''
Democrats trumpet that split between their candidate and Obama as Carnahan tries to run as an outsider. But Republicans have tagged her ``Rubberstamp Robin'' for supporting Obama's health care bill and other congressional initiatives.
Probably no vulnerable Democrat has more of a burden in defending Obama's budget than Rep. John Spratt (D-S.C.), the House Budget Committee Chairman who is facing a strong opponent in his Republican-leaning district.
The National Republican Congressional Committee has already run an ad attacking him for his record in handling deficit-laden budgets. But Spratt has not shied from his association with the volatile issue. When Obama's budget was delivered to Capitol Hill Monday, Spratt joined in a ``photo op'' for its reception.
The photo was run on a conservative blog under the headline: ``Budget now in Spratt's liberal hands.''
Looks like they are starting to throw OBama under the bus. Is it to little to late, stay tune, November is getting closer.
|
| 183 | Seattle Zen
Leader
ID: 055343019
Thu, Feb 04, 2010, 21:47
|
Looks like they are starting to throw OBama under the bus. Is it to little to late, stay tune, November is getting closer.
I'm assuming this is where your commentary began because of the spelling mistakes. The only thing I believe you got correct was the literal fact that November is getting closer. Still have an entire nine months to spin, obstruct, obfuscate and act immature, plenty of time for the Republicans.
But I fail to see anything that resembles Congressional Democrats "throwing" the President anywhere. The President is certainly more popular nationally than any Republican, Scott Brown's radiant glow has now faded. Seriously, NG, I know you are jumping up and down praying for, what is it, a "bloodbath" in nine months, but how much of that is wishful thinking and how much of that is based on objective poll numbers?
|
| 184 | Perm Dude
ID: 5510572522
Thu, Feb 04, 2010, 22:04
|
Spelling errors, Zen? C'mon.
|
| 185 | Seattle Zen
Leader
ID: 055343019
Thu, Feb 04, 2010, 22:13
|
My comment simply pointed out that it was impossible to tell where the story ended and his comments began. He should learn how to throw a blockquote party.
|
| 186 | Tree
ID: 248472317
Thu, Feb 04, 2010, 23:07
|
i was hoping for a link...i'm curious where the story came from...
|
| 187 | biliruben
ID: 16105237
Fri, Feb 05, 2010, 00:06
|
Baltimore Sun, though I found it on a site called "BitchaboutObama.com".
|
| 188 | Boldwin
ID: 26451820
Fri, Feb 05, 2010, 04:16
|
On Rush today, he pointed out that the free market always nails these things best. You suddenly can't find an Obama t-shirt among Washington street vendors anymore which is a big turn-around.
|
| 189 | Mith
ID: 43914286
Fri, Feb 05, 2010, 04:39
|
Its the dead of winter. I don't know about DC but in NYC at this time of year you see maybe 1/10th the street vendors you will see 4 months from now.
Not that I wouldn't welcome the end of the Obama novelty item fad, if he's right.
|
| 190 | Boldwin
ID: 26451820
Fri, Feb 05, 2010, 06:16
|
Yeah, but with global warming you don't even bother to put on a jacket over that t-shirt in a Washington winter anymore.
|
| 191 | biliruben
ID: 461142511
Fri, Feb 05, 2010, 13:30
|
The Education of Henry Adams.
He had but to ask:If a Congressman is a hog, what is a Senator? This innocent question, put in a candid spirit, petrified any executive officer that ever sat a week in his office. Even Adams admitted that Senators passed belief. The comic side of their egotism partly disguised its extravagance, but faction had gone so far under Andrew Johnson that at times the whole Senate seemed to catch hysterics of nervous bucking without apparent reason. Great leaders, like Sumner and Conkling, could not be burlesqued; they were more grotesque than ridicule could make them. . . . but their egotism and factiousness were no laughing matter. They did permanent and terrible mischief. . . . The most troublesome task of a reform President was that of bringing the Senate back to decency.
Hat tip Jon Zasloff.
Same as it apparently ever was.
|
| 192 | Nuclear Gophers
ID: 7115138
Sun, Feb 07, 2010, 11:29
|
From Blanche Lincolns reelection web site-
Lincoln challenges Obama on liberal "extremes"
By Steve Patterson on Wednesday, February 3, 2010
Politico
by Glenn Thrush
www.politico.com
The seminal moment of this morning's q-and-a between Senate Democrats and President Obama was an extraordinary -- and extraordinarily uncomfortable -- exchange between Blanche Lincoln and Obama over the party's left and right wings.
Obama, in professorial mode, had spent much of the first hour of today's appearance instructing Democrats to stay his progressive course on health care and other key issues.
Lincoln, who faces serious competition in her '10 re-elect -- and a 27 percent approval rate in Arkansas -- practically demanded Obama "push back in our own party... for people at the extremes."
She added that "no one in your administration" understands how to make payroll.
Obama shot back hard, warning Lincoln, gently but firmly, that he had no intention of adopting the previous administration's policies, cautioning, "I don't know what would differentiate us from the other guys." [quickie transcript]
"We should not be spooked," he added.
Well it looks like she is peeking under the republican tent. I guess you do that when your approval rate is at 27% and your are down in the polls by at least 25 points. It looks like she has picked Obama up in her process to throw him under the bus. This is a lot of fun to watch.
|
| 193 | Perm Dude
ID: 5510572522
Sun, Feb 07, 2010, 13:14
|
It is pretty clear that for a Democrat to win in the South they will have to run hard right. I don't think Lincoln will win, myself, but she's certainly doing whatever she has to do to try to win.
|
| 194 | Perm Dude
ID: 211880
Mon, Feb 08, 2010, 01:08
|
IL Lt Gov Candidate dropping out of race.
You'd think a pawnbroker and steroid user who abused his ex-wife and threatened his prostitute ex-girlfriend with a knife would be hitting all sorts of Chicago focus groups...
|
If you believe a recent post violates the policy on Civility and Respect,
you may report the abuse via email to moderators@rotoguru1.com |
|
|
|
Post a reply to this message:
|