I Couldn't Have Said it Better Myself: Great LTE

By: Lowell
Published On: 7/10/2006 6:13:49 AM

There's a great LTE (letter to the editor) in today's Fredericksburg Free-Lance Star.  Entitled, "Allenites gear up for a nasty Senate campaign," it's by "a lifelong Republican" named Judith Murray, responding to an op-ed by Dennis Lister, vice chairman of the Fredericksburg Republican Committee, on why he - SHOCKER! - does not support Jim Webb for US Senate.  According to Ms. Murray (bolding added for emphasis):

If you love President Bush, you love his clone, George Allen, a good ol' boy who reiterates Bush's words and adopts his manner down to the cowboy boots.

Republican "morals" during this administration have been manifested in Congress' actions--legislating to benefit its donors, not our country.

Every bill passed has been loaded with pork. The only budget cuts have been at the expense of the poor and those with no influence.

When confronted with blatant corruption, Congress didn't manage to pass reform legislation. It was too busy raising hysteria about homosexuals and flag-burners, both evidently major threats to our country and Constitution.

For many years, Republicans stood for fiscal responsibility and personal rights--keeping government out of our lives and homes.

To me, this current congressional stance and that of Sen. Allen, along with the debacle of Iraq, is immoral and dishonest. It threatens the future of our children.

Mr. Lister has every right to disagree with Mr. Webb, but questioning the morals of a man who voices his opinions honestly and thoughtfully gives us a preview of the trite-slogan-riddled, fear-mongering campaign Sen. Allen will pursue.

Why not try discussing real issues--the record of the Congress and of Sen. Allen?

Wow, that sounds like stuff we say over here at Raising Kaine every day.  Hey, Ms. Lister, if you have nothing better to do, we're always looking for good writers! :)

Comments



Ms. Murray :) (summercat - 7/10/2006 8:02:23 AM)
wrote a great op-ed--thanks for catching it, Lowell!


The writer's last question is a good one - (I.Publius - 7/10/2006 8:05:54 AM)
Why not try discussing real issues--the record of the Congress and of Sen. Allen?

Why won't candidate Webb answer Allen's question -- which specific votes of Allen's does Webb disagree with?

Pretty simply question, ain't it?



Don't think (Alicia - 7/10/2006 10:18:25 AM)
there was enough time in the entire hour to cover every Bush aligned vote that Webb must disagree with.


Are you paying attention? (Bubby - 7/10/2006 10:41:02 AM)
Well then, lets start with Allen's biggest specific vote.  The vote to authorize force in Iraq. Bad then. Bad now. A $500,000,000,000 mistake and foolish foreign policy decision. Allen just offers more of the same - we stay in Iraq until George Bush sends me the memo saying we can leave. That isn't leadership, that is blind obedience to failed policy. Big difference.

Tax policy: Income tax cuts for guys like Bubby who don't need them while we wage war on borrowed dollars.

War spending: Continuing to sweep the real cost of the Iraq/Ghany war under the carpet by passing stop-gap funding instead of adding the cost to Bush's Budget.

Energy policy: Allen voted to drill the Alaska Wilderness rather than advance a viable plan to address the real issue - dependence on petroleum.

Flag burning Amendment: Allen voted to add an Amendment to the United States Constitution making it illegal to burn our flag.  Do-nothing-pandering-politician.

There you go Publius, a compendium of incompetence.  And mind your manners -don't continue to troll-rate comments you disagree with.  Unless you want to lose your seat.



I'm paying attention (Roger Jarrell - 7/10/2006 11:14:41 AM)
1.  Tax policy -- Allen has supported income tax cuts for all Americans, including you Bubby, for the simple reason that tax cuts have had and will continue to have a stimulative effect on the economy.  For whatever reason, certain liberals don't like to look at the economic facts surrounding tax cuts.  Instead, you try to play the class envy card. 

Whether you like it, or not, all Americans deserve the opportunity to become wealthy like Bubby.  Bubby was a hardworker in his day and should enjoy the fruits of his labor.

In addition, it is a recognized axiom that as marginal tax rates decrease, revenues will increase over time.  To see this in action, look at those socialist nations which have 90% tax rates -- revenue production decreases as marginal tax rates increase.

2.  Flag Amendment -- I just love how RK has neglected any mention of this from Bob Gibson's article:

"At the close of Allen's remarks, Legion officers singled him out for a special ovation for supporting a constitutional ban on burning the American flag. Allen voted for the amendment, which the Senate rejected two weeks ago. Webb, who opposes the amendment on free-speech grounds, did not mention the flag amendment and received no comparable recognition, even though he is a legionnaire."

If I had only read RK on this subject, I would have gained a sense that Allen was ridden out of town on a rail.  Funny how there are always two-sides to every story.

Typical.



Actually (phriendlyjaime - 7/10/2006 11:46:23 AM)
2.  Flag Amendment -- I just love how RK has neglected any mention of this from Bob Gibson's article:

"At the close of Allen's remarks, Legion officers singled him out for a special ovation for supporting a constitutional ban on burning the American flag. Allen voted for the amendment, which the Senate rejected two weeks ago. Webb, who opposes the amendment on free-speech grounds, did not mention the flag amendment and received no comparable recognition, even though he is a legionnaire."

I was there, and that is a gross misstatement by Gibson. 



Gross misstatement? (Roger Jarrell - 7/10/2006 2:22:15 PM)
Take it up with Gibson.  However, your characterization of "gross misstatement" suggests that you recognize some level of truth in the statement.

Answer these questions and I'll take your word for it:
1. Did Allen receive applause regarding the constitutional ban?  Yes or no.

2. Did officers single him out in any fashion for his vote regarding the Constitutional Amendment?  Yes or no.

3. Did Senator John Warner receive applause, ovation, or thanks regarding the proposed constitutional amendment vote?

4. Describe any and all response that Allen did receive regarding the ovation?

5. State the basis for your assertion that Bob Gibson's article is incorrect.

6. Do you believe that Bob Gibson lied in his article?  Yes or no.

7.  State the basis upon which you believe that Bob Gibson lied in his article.



The economy is about more than Roger's tax bill (Bubby - 7/10/2006 12:44:10 PM)
You dashed right by that $500,000,000 (and growing) hole in the economy - treasure we spent on "Iraqi Freedom".  War costs money and somebody has to pay for it.  Senator Allen's plan is to add it to the debt and have our children pay it off.  I disagree. So does James Webb.

Tax cuts have had a stimulative effect on the economy?? Wrong. Put down the kool-aid and review these items:

Investment spending? Non-residential investment spending (non-morgage) has been lower under Bush (10.45%) than under Clinton (11.18%).  Bush tax cuts have not stimulated economic investment.

Wage Growth? Corporate profits have increased-- 8.54%in 2001 to 13.88% in the first quarter of 2006.  The average hourly wage of production workers was $14.70 in November 2001 and $16.61 in April 2006 for an increase of 13%.  Over the same period, the overall inflation index increased from 177.4 to 201.5 for an increase of 13.58%.  This makes the inflation-adjusted wages for production workers -.5% for this expansion. 

Jobs Growth?  There were 130,883,000 jobs in the US in November 2001 and 135,106,000 in May 2006 for a total gain of 4,223,000.  That's a compound annual growth rate of .70% Not much to brag about there.

GDP growth?  The US median GrossDomesticProduct growth for the 1990s was 3.7%.  For this expansion, the median GDP growth is 3.1% for 2002-2005 and 3.5% for 2003-2005. Bush's supply-side, trickle down ecomomics don't stimulate the ecomomy any more than Clinton's (and Clinton balanced the budget and created a surplus).

So Roger, the facts speak for themselves regarding Republican tax policies - they are a pandering bid to voters  offering lower marginal rates, paid for with a stagnant economy, crappy jobs, lower wages, and a mountain of national debt. 

But hey, you got more jack in YOUR pocket so I understand why you want to tow the party line.



oh.....Bubby (Roger Jarrell - 7/10/2006 1:19:49 PM)
"The lady doth protest too much."

If you are so confident in your position, I submit that you should propose a 15% increase.  If can cannot agree with the premise that tax cuts have a stimulative effect on the economy, then the converse would be true.  So, go ahead, propose rate increases. 

If you have some of that extra limosine liberal jack, send it my way.  I'll gladly take it.



I'm just putting the truth to the Republican lie. (Bubby - 7/10/2006 1:37:29 PM)
It got Reagan elected. It got Bush elected. But trickle-down economic policies didn't solve the problem that Republicans told us was ailing America. That alone is the reason they should be rejected.  They don't work. And they balloon the budget deficits.  Do you support spending money you don't have?  Or more accurately, suggest that my kids should pay for your tax cut?

Q: Roger,who was the last President that delivered your country a budget surplus?

A: Bill Clinton, the same guy that delivered this real economic improvement;

From 1995 to 1998, the proportion of families with incomes of $50,000 or more rose from 20% to 33.8%, while the proportion with incomes below $10,000 fell about 17% to 12.6%.

THAT is the kind of economic stimulation America needs.



Go ahead, make my day.... (Roger Jarrell - 7/10/2006 2:16:01 PM)
campaign on tax increases and increased government spending.


The platform: (Bubby - 7/10/2006 2:55:32 PM)
Republicans have proven (twice) that Trickle-Down economics mean budget deficits, huge national debt, and stagnant wages. On the other hand, large corporation profits are up.  How are you doing?  Ready for a change?


I will take it then... (Roger Jarrell - 7/10/2006 3:47:28 PM)
that you favor increasing taxes.  Yes?


Ready for Change? (Bubby - 7/10/2006 3:58:44 PM)
The first thing we do is stop doing what we've been doing - Spending and Borrowing. Vote Democratic, let President Bush know its time to get serious about good government.


...and increase taxes? (Roger Jarrell - 7/10/2006 4:04:21 PM)
I'll take your response as a "yes."


ZZZZZZZzzzzzzzzzz....... (thegools - 7/11/2006 12:32:52 AM)
Taxes!!!  Beware of the Booggy man!....

Again ZZZZzzzzzzzz.....  .  .  .



Again, I'll take that as a "yes." (Roger Jarrell - 7/11/2006 8:40:50 AM)


We know, we know (hrconservative - 7/11/2006 11:21:23 PM)
You took "that" as a yes five times now. I agree with you and everything, but come on. In fact, I am going to beat you to it after I post this.


I'll take that as a yes (hrconservative - 7/11/2006 11:22:05 PM)


COMMENT HIDDEN (I.Publius - 7/10/2006 3:07:12 PM)


Remember when the Republican Congress shut down the Government? (Bubby - 7/10/2006 3:40:37 PM)
In 1995.  That was a real hoot wasn't it? That's the sort of Government you get with Republicans - showboat politics, all hat, no cow.  Sorta like the Virginia House of Delegates.  You would think the fools would learn huh?

What a flameout for Repubs, from Contract With America to shutting down the US Government in 12 months. Followed by Gingrich's ethics problems -  greed, lying, and standard Republican corruption we have come to expect.

By the 1998 the party was over.  America was sick of Gingrich, Republican Politics and the Repubs lost seats in the House. Glorious years.



Abundance (seveneasypeaces - 7/10/2006 5:57:52 PM)
I don't mind paying taxes as long as they support society and not Halliburton.  Good roads, good schools, good environment, good services bring in good business which creates prosperous society.  Put money into your city, state, country and you will get good prosperity out of it as long as Democrats are in leadership.  Republicans just suck it out of society for themselves. Democrats don't mind spending their money for value.  Republicans spend other's money for gain.  I don't mind paying my due.



COMMENT HIDDEN (I.Publius - 7/10/2006 11:51:35 AM)


A Better Idea ... Let's have Webb and Allen debate the issues!! (Tony Mastalski - 7/10/2006 1:08:35 PM)
Yeah, let them debate ... I'll put my guy in the ring any day any time ... But beware .... Webb will unmask George Allen for what he is ... a pandering careerist politician with the intellect of a "fence post" (Steve Colbert).

Oh wait a minute ... that was the first thing the Webb campaign proposed since winning the primary and Dick Wadham's is waffling that one ... avoiding the issues debate in favor of image re-building of a Bush / Cheney Republican. Let's face it ... that in itself is a huge task.

When your team gets the gonads to show up ... let us know! Till then go troll somewhere else.



"Your guy" had his chance this past weekend (I.Publius - 7/10/2006 3:08:32 PM)
on the talking head shows.  And he punted. 

But nice try anyway.



Punting is what UVA had to do repeatedly... (Loudoun County Dem - 7/10/2006 3:13:19 PM)
...when G.Felix Allen was their quarterback.


COMMENT HIDDEN (I.Publius - 7/10/2006 3:20:58 PM)


Explain how Webb punted... (Loudoun County Dem - 7/10/2006 3:30:27 PM)
...or could you not understand that Stephanopoulos interviewed Webb first? How did you think he was able to ask Felix to respond to statements that Webb had just made in his interview? Did you think Stephanopoulos was clairvoyant?

I suppose Webb was supposed to respond to what Felix was going to say (that actually is plausible since Felix has no original thoughts).



COMMENT HIDDEN (hrconservative - 7/10/2006 4:44:56 PM)


...I thought that Felix was the 3rd stringer. (Roger Jarrell - 7/10/2006 3:49:09 PM)
If as what I have read here, poor Felix was only the 3rd string QB...so he wouldn't have been the starting QB, eh?


Specifics? (Lowell - 7/10/2006 3:41:48 PM)
Try here for starters.  There's a lot more which I need to add.


I think it would be helpful for Jim to describe which portions of the Reagan Revolution he supported.... (Roger Jarrell - 7/10/2006 3:55:27 PM)
and those he didn't.

Here's a start:
1. The 1981 Kemp Roth Tax Act;
2. SDI;
3. the firing of PATCO employees;
4. appointment of conservative judges;
5. support for the Contras;
6. deregulation;
7. revamping Western lands policies;
8. nomination of Justice Scalia;
9. invasion of Grenada;
10. massive increase in defense spending.

Since he has cited his past involvement with Ronald Reagan...and he has now become a "Reagan Democrat"...I think it is a fair question to ask where he differs with the programs promoted by his former boss.



COMMENT HIDDEN (Alicia - 7/10/2006 4:40:58 PM)


No...it's Roger (Roger Jarrell - 7/10/2006 4:47:05 PM)
a/k/ Lewis Armistead.  My name is Roger A. Jarrell from Lexington, VA