Bush Campaigning for Simon

NewsMax ^ | 3/17/02 | Limbacher

[dalereed]

If Simon can maintain a lead in the polls in the next 3 or 4 months Davis will implode and start making rash out of the ballpark statements and Simon will win it big.

[Buckeroo]

Gray Davis has already imploded.

[goldstategop]

Oh? It will be fun then to watch Gov. Gray Davis go into full panic mode.

[The Vast Right Wing]

Maybe that ought to tell you about what the results of the polls are. Davis is behind but the media is unwilling to publish the results of the polls. They don't want to give simon any momentum.

[Buckeroo]

He *IS* in panic.

He knows that he short changed California. I am going to ensure he continues his public offering of screwing America and even California.

[Bonaparte]

"The ONLY reason I oppose Lazio is that he MOCKED my country's Constitution."

Really? I didn't know Albania had a constitution.

[GVnana]

Dump Davis Dittos.

I think we should hold a DUMP DAVIS RALLY AT THE CAPITOL. Bring plastic trash cans with signs saying, "Lousy Schools" "Higher Taxes" "Energy Swindle" etc., etc.

And don't forget Rush's slogan: "Vote for Simon. He's not insane!"

[going hot]

Hey EG DAN,

Did you check out the new poll that has Simon ahead of Davis by 7 points statewide?

[Tuco-bad]

How pray tell did he (Lazio) do that? Was it anything like Clinton making a recess appointment of Bill Lann Lee to Solicitor General after he had been rejected by the Senate? Or the illegal break-in to kidnap Elian Gonzalez?

No it was Lazio voting on legislation in which he had a financial interest.

[dalereed]

Letter to the editor in todays paper.

The lack of brain function of Davis is reaching the public!

The reason that Homeland Security Director Tom Ridge had to demonstrate the color-coded squares of terror alertness was so politicians like Gov. Gray Davis, who posted National Guard members at state bridges last fall after learning of a threat later proven to be not credible, could understand it.

[Grampa Dave]

Thanks for the post/thread!

The gay predators who control the SF GayRonicle were/are in full attack mode against Simon according to Mel Morgan, right now on KSFO!

Davis will use the race card, the abortion card and the so called anti gay card to try and win this election. He will have the maggots who control the fish wraps and tv channels on his side.

This election will be extremely nasty! We need to put on our crash helmets and fasten our shoulder belts for what is coming between now and November!

[BOBTHENAILER]

Thanks for the Simon Ping. Sent my check today. Energy will be Davis' downfall. CA is what, 15 billion or so in debt because of his inaction?

It may be coming again. Natural gas prices have increased from around $2.00 per mcf to over $3.12 mcf today, in the last month. A hot summer, low hydroelectric contribution from the NW and it will be deja vu all over again. The 800lb gorilla could be sitting right on Davis' head.

[BornOnTheFourth]

I think we should hold a DUMP DAVIS RALLY AT THE CAPITOL. Bring plastic trash cans with signs saying, "Lousy Schools" "Higher Taxes" "Energy Swindle" etc., etc.

That's a GREAT idea! LOL...I can see it now!

Simon BUMP!

[let freedom sing]

Simon: OK, Davis-- Deal.

Davis deals Simon the race card, the abortion card, and the anti-gay card.)

Davis: HA! Look at that! Sorry, Paad-nah. You lose!

Davis reaches for the pot

Simon: Wait a minute. (reaches for Davis' arm) What's that you've got up your sleeve?

Davis: Oh, that? That's the Energy-crisis card--

Simon: I already played that one-- saaaaaay-- you've been cheating me and the rest of the voters in this game. Let me see those cards. (inspects fine print on cards) Just as I suspected-- "made in Davis Country". You're under arrest, Davis-- there's new Sheriff in town.

Simon tears open his shirt, revealing another shirt with a great big "S."

<

[lasereye]

No it was Lazio voting on legislation in which he had a financial interest.

You obviously have no idea what's in the Constitution. It may be unethical, if he in fact did that, but it's not unconstitutional. What exactly was his financial interest and what was the vote on?

I assume you're real worked up about Hillary Clinton representing Madison Guaranty Savings and Loan before the Arkansas state banking commission and persuading them not to shut it down while her hubby was Governor, (which eventually cost a few billion extra in taxpayer's money to bail it out). Madison, owned by their friends the MacDougals, had sunk huge amounts of money into the Whitewater development, also owned primarily by the MacDougals, and in which the Clintons had a direct financial interest.

I'll bet you would never vote for Hillary Clinton because of that, eh?

You were probably PO'd about Clinton pardoning Marc Rich after his wife had given huge $ to Clinton's campaigns also. If Clinton ran for say, California Governor, I'll bet you would never vote for him because of that.

[Tuco-bad]

You obviously have no idea what's in the Constitution. It may be unethical, if he in fact did that, but it's not unconstitutional. What exactly was his financial interest and what was the vote on?

Lazio took an oath of office to “…protect and defend the Constitution of the United States…”.

Lazio was the leading advocate in the House for abolishing provisions of the Glass-Steagall Act of 1932 (which separated commercial banking from investment banking), while owning stock options that would benefit by the nullification.

[lasereye]

Lazio took an oath of office to “…protect and defend the Constitution of the United States…”.

He did not take an oath to "protect and defend the Constitution of the United States." Only the President takes that oath. But that's completely beside the point anyway. You're not explaining what was unconstitutional about the vote in the first place. There's nothing in the Constitution prohibiting someone from voting on something in which they have a financial interest.

On the other hand, bills like the Glass Steagal Act itself are probably unconstitutional, since the Constitution reserves all powers to the individual states other than those explicitly granted to the federal government. In fact, most of the activities of the federal government are probably unconstitutional.

Since you're a Democrat, I doubt you have the foggiest idea what the Constitution actually says. Democrats tend to think it says whatever they want it to say.

[Tuco-bad]

. There's nothing in the Constitution prohibiting someone from voting on something in which they have a financial interest.

The House has ethic rules which prohibit voting on matters in which one has a financial interest.

[lasereye]

Ethics rules are not the Constitution! House ethics rules are created by the House. There doesn't have to be any ethics rules at all. Why can't you get it through your skull there's no constitution issue.

Further, if there is such a rule and he did that, why wasn't there an investigation by the House ethics committee?

[Tuco-bad]

if there is such a rule and he did that, why wasn't there an investigation by the House ethics committee?

Who controls committee investigations? answer the Reps.

The Reps didn't want to kill their chances in 2000.

It was bad enough that the Reps felt they had to bar Lazio from making a speech at the Rep Convention, which probably cost Bush 2,000,000 votes and 4 seats in the Senate.