Murkiness: Alaska Radio Host Off the Air and Murkowski Plays the Dyslexic Card
[Guest post by Aaron Worthing; send your tips here.]
Yesterday I noted how, in a very Army of Davids sort of way, ordinary voters put a serious monkey wrench in Murkowski’s reelection bid:
An effort by Lisa Murkowski to increase her chances to win seems to have backfired. As you know, Murky was defeated by Joe Miller in the primary but chose to run as a write in. Of course she has one really huge barrier winning: her challenging-to-spell last name. She previously urged the election board to accept entries like “Lisa” and “Lisa M.” as meaning her, which in the second case, I guess it is not unreasonable. Then she convinced the Alaska Division of Elections to give out lists of write in candidates. This approach was eventually approved by the Alaskan Supreme Court: “The lists can be shown to voters who request them, the high court ruled, but candidates’ party affiliation must be removed.”
So then some radio host says to his listeners, more or less, “Hey, why don’t a bunch of regular people, my listeners, go and register as official write in candidates?” And they did, well over one hundred of them. You can read the list, here. Now there are several Lisas and at least one other “Lisa M.” (its her middle name) and a few Polish-sounding names that end in “ski.” So this might actually have set her back. Heh.
I wonder if calling her “Murky” would count?
Since then I have learned that Dan Reihl at Big Government also made a similar solicitation, which was promoted by Conservatives For Palin, so who knows who had the most influence.
But whoever was responsible, Murkowski is pissed. First, that Radio Host, Dan Fagan, is off the air. On her facebook page, Sarah Palin unloaded with both barrels:
Does all this sound heavy handed? It is. It is an interference with Dan Fagan’s constitutional right to free speech. It is also a shocking indictment against Lisa Murkowski. How low will she go to hold onto power? First, she gets the Division of Elections to change its write-in process – a process that Judge Pfiffner correctly determined had been in place without change for 50 years. She is accepting financial support from federal contractors, an act that is highly questionable and now pending before the FEC. And today, she played her last card. She made it clear that if you disagree with her and encourage others to exercise their civic rights, she’ll take you off the air.
Meanwhile via her spokemodel, Murky is complaining that how utterly unfair this all is, saying:
Murkowski campaign spokesman Steve Wackowski tells Salon that “Operation Alaska Chaos” could cause problems for people in Alaska — including native Alaskans — whose first language is not English.
“I think it shows the desperation of Miller’s supporters. Quite frankly, I think it’s pretty sad,” he said. “For someone who is dyslexic or needs assistance, it’s dissappointing [sic] … but we’re not shocked. “
The Murkowski camp is distributing wristbands, cards, and buttons with the candidate’s name to assist write-in voters.
Murky, let me tell you, I am dyslexic, and you can go to Hell for trying to invoke the serious issue of disability discrimination for your petty political ambitions. Guess what? Daddy can give you that Senate seat, but he can’t guarantee reelection.
Update: Minor correction.
[Posted and authored by Aaron Worthing.]
It will be an interesting insight into Alaska residents on election day. Murkowski is pretty clearly invoking her ability to bring home the bacon as the justification for her running in spite of losing the primary. I love Alaska and once considered moving there. I still have a medical license in Alaska. The people are quirky and there are a lot of nuts but they seem to trend libertarian and I don’t think this approach will work.
Mike K (568408) — 10/30/2010 @ 8:32 amIs Murky doing COKE again?
daleyrocks (940075) — 10/30/2010 @ 8:40 amI am dumbfounded the Alaska Supreme Court changed the election rules just to please her. What did she promise them? That’s not a good thing to say, but it is certainly suspicious.
PatAZ (9d1bb3) — 10/30/2010 @ 8:45 amMurky symbolizes the frantic, futile, frenzy that the impotent, at its core, Ruling Class will undertake to keep its position when the Country Class gathers at the gates of the manse, lighting the night sky with their torches, while preparing the tar and feathers for the intended guest of honor.
AD-RtR/OS! (f2f112) — 10/30/2010 @ 8:55 amWear them well Lisa, you’ve earned them.
That’s not a good thing to say, but it is certainly suspicious.
In this surreal mess of an election, I think it’s an absolutely necessary thing to say.
Dana (8ba2fb) — 10/30/2010 @ 8:57 amSo we’re supposed to admire this radio host and his friends for deliberately setting out to confuse people?
Angeleno (2774d5) — 10/30/2010 @ 9:08 amThe longer Murkowski stays under the microscope, the uglier the image becomes.
Alaska needs to purge this virus from the Senate.
When I hear her speak, it sounds not so much that she may be dyslexic, but that she’s been sipping from Nancy Pelosi’s Diet Coke with just a skosh of lime. And you know how much these elitist’s like their skoshes.
NEW POST:
“AMERICA THE LAWLESS: WHY OBAMA ORDERED A HIT ON ARIZONA”
heir2freedom (d9456e) — 10/30/2010 @ 9:14 amhttp://heir2freedom.blogspot.com/2010/10/america-lawless-why-obama-ordered-hit.html
So we’re supposed to admire this radio host and his friends for deliberately setting out to confuse people?
So you approve of a politician using their clout to get a radio host removed from the air for doing nothing that was actually illegal, merely because it hampered the politician’s chances of re-election?
Another Chris (2d8013) — 10/30/2010 @ 9:17 amIf I didn’t live in Florida I never would have thought it possible for any Alaskan to vote for someone as desperate as Murky.
Down here as we say the rules are different. We have the democrats, the party that supposedly best represents minorities, pushing to get the black man candidate to quit so the whiter than white guy candidate (and former republican) can beat the hispanic candidate.
cubanbob (409ac2) — 10/30/2010 @ 9:27 am“Murkowski is pretty clearly invoking her ability to bring home the bacon as the justification for her running in spite of losing the primary. ”
Cue pic of Palin wearing a “nowhere, Alaska” t-shirt.
imdw (ec7c03) — 10/30/2010 @ 9:28 amProbaly my biggest problem with the Republican leadership right now is that they haven’t repudiated the senior senator from Alaska. Why hasn’t she been reprimanded by the caucus for running against the party nominee? Is this just the go-along-get-along attitude that we’ve seen before and will see again?
Kevin M (298030) — 10/30/2010 @ 9:29 am#8 Another Chris
Murkowski’s campaign complained, as is their right. The decision to suspend the on-air personality was made by station management, as is their right.
The fact remains that this was a deliberate attempt to profit from confusing voters. The contempt for democracy is pretty clear.
Angeleno (2774d5) — 10/30/2010 @ 9:35 amDo they have newspapers in Alaska?
Would it be difficult for an adult of sound mind to cut out a newspaper article with her name on it, or to copy it down onto a piece of paper?
Do they strip-search you in Alaska to prevent going into the voting both with a piece of paper?
If someone cannot figure out to go to the polling place knowing how to spell the name (by having it written down) of the candidate they want to vote for, I say that is a reasonable disqualification from voting, or am I missing something? (Other than she is desperate to still win and sees all of this as campaigning.)
I do wish her efforts would not only backfire in the number of potential write-in candidates, but that those who would have voted for her are offended that she thinks they can’t spell and stay home.
MD in Philly (3d3f72) — 10/30/2010 @ 9:43 amNonsense. The write-in option exists so anyone can run for office without having to join up with a particular party. If Liza Mazursky wants to run as a write-in, she has the same right as anyone else. But, that wasn’t good enough for her. She wanted special treatment with her list. Well she got her list, but everyone else can sign up to be on it too. You see, she’s not special.
Anon Y. Mous (c9efca) — 10/30/2010 @ 9:46 amAngeleno, contempt for democracy was first shown by Sen. Morecowsskee. Having set a new standard by which to “play the game”, she simply wants to keep changing the rules until she has to win. When my children have tried to do that, I’ve taught them they can’t get away with it.
I guess you think the people of Alaska don’t have the sense to write her name down and take it in with them either.
MD in Philly (3d3f72) — 10/30/2010 @ 9:49 amMurkowski’s campaign complained, as is their right. The decision to suspend the on-air personality was made by station management, as is their right.
How exactly did it constitute a firing offense?
The fact remains that this was a deliberate attempt to profit from confusing voters. The contempt for democracy is pretty clear.
How was the host going to make a profit off of encouraging people to put their names on the write-in list, after the judge declared that such actions were now acceptable? His salary was a given regardless of the content of his broadcast, correct?
Furthermore, why do you believe that people would have a difficult time finding Murkowski’s name on the list, given that she has been a Senator for several years now and her name is well-known across the state?
Another Chris (2d8013) — 10/30/2010 @ 9:49 amMurkowski is exactly what is destroying America. Career politicians who ignore the People (otherwise she would have been renominated) & vote big government.
Need to read a thriller just out about Americans who finally take a stand cause it’s about each of us & possibly history asking us to fulfill our true destiny in life. It’s that powerful!
At least Tuesday night will be entertaining with election results, popcorn & beer.
MountainView (6229ff) — 10/30/2010 @ 9:53 amLook into minute 39, and you’ll see how this came about, the fellow involved is one of the write ins
http://content.streamaudio.com/podcast/81/danfaganhour1.mp3
ian cormac (6709ab) — 10/30/2010 @ 9:59 amIt’s unfortunate to confuse voters, but the entire point of a write-in provision has been broken. Murkowski lost her primary and had crooks change the rules so that she got on this psuedo ballot anyway.
And who are you to say these other people can’t be seriously running for office? People seriously run for office without intending to win, all the time. Meeks is doing that to keep Crist from winning. Nader does it all the time. It’s their God given right, and it’s not legit for Lisa Murkowski to pull people off the radio, using her very wealthy circle of crooked supporters.
These people wanted to somewhat mitigate the fact that Lisa has had the rules changed unfairly in her favor. She doesn’t have the right to be on the ballot. She lost a primary and missed the registration deadline. It’s unfair to the people who followed the law for Lisa to have a special write-in list. If her supporters don’t know her name, that’s tough crap for her.
The Miller campaign fought against people registering as write-ins, and deserve some respect for that. But Lisa pushed pushed pushed and now she has hurt her chances badly.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 10/30/2010 @ 10:02 amAnd let’s be more clear. Lisa had a wealthy supporter pressure the station to silence this voice. It’s not a mere complaint. What Palin does is complaining… on facebook. She doesn’t send lackeys to thug and chill expression.
If you aren’t disgusted by Lisa’s actions here, I don’t know what to say to you.
She gets to electioneer and screw with election rules over and over and over again, but how dare someone encourage people to exercise their right to run against Lisa!!!! Sorry… Fagan was following the rules, and Lisa got to break them again.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 10/30/2010 @ 10:05 amTo answer another question, the main paper the AD News, only online now, is flacking for Murkowski
ian cormac (6709ab) — 10/30/2010 @ 10:10 amrather relentlessly, and attacking Miller, 24/7,
Indeed, Ian. The press there is already relentlessly shilling for Lisa and against Joe. It’s interesting that one of the few pundits that didn’t got wiped out, right?
Alaska can choose what kind of state they want to be on Tuesday. Angelino’s argument is that this confuses people from being prompted as to which write-in candidate to support. I think that’s silly… the entire point of a write-in candidate is that you already know who they are without being prompted, and Lisa just wants to break the rules again.
But even if you don’t like Fagan’s speech, that he’s been silenced is disturbing in particular because Alaska is approaching media uniformity. AD News certainly isn’t talking about Lisa’s corruption. And how can they? If they do, they will be fired too.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 10/30/2010 @ 10:13 amLiza Mostenkowski is making a fool of herself. She should bow out gracefully even at this late hour. Just stop it! Now!
PatAZ (9d1bb3) — 10/30/2010 @ 10:15 amComment by ian cormac — 10/30/2010 @ 10:10 am
AD-RtR/OS! (f2f112) — 10/30/2010 @ 10:19 amian, please, I don’t appreciate any inference that connects me with the Anchorage Daily News – though, I did read it when stationed at Elmendorf, but it was the only paper available.
Could you, in the future, refer to it as the ADN?
Dustin,
Ehhh, I dont know the guy was ACTIVELY interfering in an election process – I’m not defending Lisa, nor the Alaskan Supreme Court but – it might be that the guy broke the law.
He’s someone that should have been shut down – makes Olberman look like Clarence Thomas
Viterol has limits
EricPWJohnson (2d1c68) — 10/30/2010 @ 10:20 amWith out a doubt, now that radio host, kind of a combination of Levin and J & K, has been hounding
ian cormac (6709ab) — 10/30/2010 @ 10:21 amSarah for the better part of 3 1/2 years, and he is the big cheese, even though once upon a time, she was a fill in for him, THe AD News is so far in the tank for Lisa, they make the LA Times seem honest
Sorry AD, didn’t mean that, the Daily News well it’s typical of the McClatchy brand from Anchorage
ian cormac (6709ab) — 10/30/2010 @ 10:25 amto Miami, and all points in between.
I disagree. I think this is a legitimate form of civil reaction to the way our election system was hampered by an activist court. This special provision for Lisa Murkowski didn’t exist in Alaska’s entire history. She shouldn’t be on a pseudo ballot without registering by the deadline for being on the real ballot and/or winning a primary. Asking people to run against her implicitly is an effort to keep Lisa from winning, but so what? That’s how democracy works. People have the right to encourage candidates to compete with Lisa for votes, IMO. I think the law has spoken about this kind of speech from radio hosts… it was a common argument against Rush’s operation Chaos, and I simply cannot accept constraining that kind of legitimate expression. This is what America is about. If Lisa wanted to have her name printed on some kind of ballot, she should have won a primary.
At any rate, I’ve listened to a few of his broadcasts and absolutely cannot stand this pundit. Your comparison to Olbermann is legit.
But I support his right to be an annoying SOB.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 10/30/2010 @ 10:28 amYes, I know. They were/are part and parcel of the insider group (Murkowski/Stevens/etc), and anything connected to the Sarahcuda is antithetical to them, and they will go, have gone, to extreme lengths to harm her, and everyone connected to her.
AD-RtR/OS! (f2f112) — 10/30/2010 @ 10:29 amBut, as the say, what goes around, comes around.
It’s disturbing to me that this limit is effectively: don’t interfere with the interests of the corrupt. This guy has expressed this level of vitriol for years against the reformers, and no one stopped him until he directed that at the powerful.
but I kinda just want to say that vitriol has no limits in America. Obscenity or libel excepted.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 10/30/2010 @ 10:31 amFreedom of Speech means that the most innane among us is allowed to speak almost unthinkable thoughts…
AD-RtR/OS! (f2f112) — 10/30/2010 @ 10:31 amBut, none of us are compelled to listen.
To elaborate on what MD in Philly said, the game has rules. The reason the game has these rules may not be because we just made them up, but because we’ve already had years and years to test them out. History didn’t begin yesterday.
The first rule was that if you lose the primary, you throw your support to the winner of the primary because that demonstrates your loyalty. But no. (That’s just a Party rule, not an election rule, though.)
The election rule is that election officials do not provide lists of write-in candidates for people. That rule was made fifty years ago and it stood. If you want to provide proper spelling for people, your campaign has to provide it, personally, and do it outside of 100 ft (or whatever the distance is in Alaska) of the polling area.
Now we find out why. If the government has to provide the list, then anyone can be on it and the government is required to be impartial. This leads to people being on the list for vanity purposes, confusion purposes, or any number of reasons that might or might not be pointless, but which can no longer be denied.
That’s why we had the rule in the first place.
luagha (3f2a53) — 10/30/2010 @ 10:45 amDustin
I’m seeing polls that show Lisa up near 50% – e will find out soon, Miller I think,if he loses really has no one to blame but himself, he tried to seal his records, he said no one could question his background, he called her prostitute after he barely won – wich many claim was his incorrect claim that lisa voted for Obamacare (she didnt)
If he cant beat a senator who was originally appointed by her father, then its best that he loses.
But who knows especially in Alaska which is rapidly becoming another California liberal state
EricPWJohnson (2d1c68) — 10/30/2010 @ 10:47 amluagha
That is not correct – that law isnt 50 years old – First of all ALASKA has barely been a state for 50 years…
Write in candidates are protected under the Voters Rights Act of 1965 ubder th Department of Justice
EricPWJohnson (2d1c68) — 10/30/2010 @ 10:54 amAlaska…Admission to the Union: January 3, 1959 (49th)!
AD-RtR/OS! (f2f112) — 10/30/2010 @ 10:57 am…epwj has been into the khat again.
AD-RtR/OS! (f2f112) — 10/30/2010 @ 10:58 amAD
Palin may have reached her limits, she took a big financial risk backing Miller
EricPWJohnson (2d1c68) — 10/30/2010 @ 11:00 amI concede the fact that Alaska likes Lisa a hell of a lot more than I can understand them liking her.
Not sure if she’s that popular, but that’s the way it is.
I think part of the problem is that the corrupt have a stranglehold on the media. You simply cannot talk about Lisa’s scandals, which are legion, without losing your job. Unless you’re a blogger, which just doesn’t do the trick yet.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 10/30/2010 @ 11:11 am“How exactly did it constitute a firing offense?”
You don’t need an offense to get fired in America.
imdw (8bb588) — 10/30/2010 @ 11:13 amnon sequitur.
A wealthy lapdog of Lisa threatened the station into firing someone because of what he said.
That’s not a reasonable firing offense. Replying that it’s legal is simply stupid or dishonest. No one is saying this is illegal. It’s simply unamerican as all hell.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 10/30/2010 @ 11:18 amIMaDickWad has become an embarrassment to DickWads everywhere.
AD-RtR/OS! (f2f112) — 10/30/2010 @ 11:20 am“That’s not a reasonable firing offense”
Hope you got a union contract that says so!
imdw (043f60) — 10/30/2010 @ 11:22 am“It’s simply unamerican as all hell.”
Oh you completely don’t get how firing works in america.
imdw (3aa593) — 10/30/2010 @ 11:44 amDustin,
This also may have been a straw-camels-back thing – who knows…
Fagan accuses alot of people on little or no evidence
being fired for crosing the line is not exactly new to him
EricPWJohnson (2d1c68) — 10/30/2010 @ 12:22 pmAnd look Sean Hannity got fired as an unpaid part time DJ for confronting a college about being direspectful to military recruiters and he parlayed that into a major market gig in Atlanta radio which in a few years worked into a multi-million dollar annual 1 hr gig on fox
So maybe we should get on Fagans good side
EricPWJohnson (2d1c68) — 10/30/2010 @ 12:27 pmFolks, please… Here in Phoenix, J.D. Hayworth had to step down from his radio show on KFYI when he ran against McLame. Otherwise, equal time provisions would have caused any other candidates to receive 3 hour blocks of time every day M-F.
Jeff S. (f9af2b) — 10/30/2010 @ 12:35 pmJeff
Yeah so did Dan Patrick when he ran for state senate and won in Texas – ont think his station ever recovered their ratings
EricPWJohnson (2d1c68) — 10/30/2010 @ 12:43 pmOnce again, you expose basic ignorance. This matter’s legality actually depends more on what state you’re in, jackass.
And while I noted it’s legal ‘in america’ I noted it’s also contrary to the spirit of discourse for a media outlet to fire someone because some rich dude threatened them on behalf of a Senator.
I think you just want to pretend you understand something you do not.
EPWJ, maybe it’s the straw that broke the camel’s back, but I’ve been looking into Fagan and he’s been bombastic for years, and I think he’s been far more crass than this for years. That ‘straw that broke the camel’s back’ argument is an extreme coincidence, since he suddenly bashed the establishment when he’s been worse to the reformers for years.
I’m calling that one unlikely.
At any rate, Alaska can decide if they want to be the kind of state where this stuff is acceptable. I don’t think we need a law to prevent this termination… I think someone else will obviously hire Fagan, since he’s the highest rated radio personality in the state. I think good people can sort this crap out without laws.
Just one of those things imdw and I differ on. Add it to the list, including issuing implied threats and laughing at child rape.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 10/30/2010 @ 1:40 pmSo?
Rush and Beck and most NPR personalities should quit rather than discuss strategies for winning elections? Why? If one of them’s running for office while broadcasting, that’s one thing (one thing I personally do not mind). Apparently it wasn’t a problem for Fagan to bash Palin and her son when she ran for office.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 10/30/2010 @ 1:44 pmC’mon, Dustin. You know that no one can prove that imdw is imdw. Remember? Someone was spoofing him when he wrote all that stuff.
Right?
Eric Blair (c8876d) — 10/30/2010 @ 1:44 pmI forgot, Eric, I forgot. He’s innocent after proven guilty.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 10/30/2010 @ 1:48 pmI thought the excuse was very childish, actually. Sometimes people get exercised and say things they regret later. Adults tend to recognize the fact, and apologize.
Instead of claiming that someone spoofed their nickname (which apparently only happened that once, and not since).
Teh Crazee….
Eric Blair (c8876d) — 10/30/2010 @ 1:50 pmFrom the link I supplied, you see that the callers
ian cormac (6709ab) — 10/30/2010 @ 1:55 pmprovided the impetus for this move, the ones that make up the Tea Party, some of which lean toward establishment figures. I don’t like Fagan, for all the reason I’ve outlined before, among other things
because he is waging the same war on Sarah’s successor, Parnell, and excuses the Democrat Berkowitz (he’s a lot like you, EPJW)but both Sarah and Riehl and C4P agree ‘he is the enemy of our enemy’ for the time being
Ian’s right. He simply allowed people to bring up an idea. I don’t mention that because I don’t really have a problem with the idea, but it is a valid point.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 10/30/2010 @ 2:06 pm“Remember? Someone was spoofing him when he wrote all that stuff.”
No i actually don’t think anyone was spoofing me. Just that they were using the same service I was.
“This matter’s legality actually depends more on what state you’re in, jackass.”
I don’t know of any state that has anything other than at will employment as the baseline. But I wasn’t speaking so much on legality, and more on its americanness.
imdw (7de3b7) — 10/30/2010 @ 4:20 pmAha. So, imdw, you did post Patterico’s address and family information, for which he moderated you (and rightly so)?
I hope you apologized. At least you will quit claiming innocence.
Eric Blair (dcced2) — 10/30/2010 @ 4:37 pm“You don’t need an offense to get fired in America.
Comment by imdw”
Try telling that to the EEOC after you fire a member of a protected class.
daleyrocks (940075) — 10/30/2010 @ 4:43 pmEPWJ is hitting the sauce again, and shocka, is defending a corrupt establishment not-conservative.
JD (a30317) — 10/30/2010 @ 5:15 pm“So, imdw, you did post Patterico’s address and family information, for which he moderated you (and rightly so)?”
I don’t think you’re understanding this:
“Just that they were using the same service I was.”
imdw (14df54) — 10/30/2010 @ 5:19 pmYou would figure by odds alone, he would get something right, you would be wrong
ian cormac (6709ab) — 10/30/2010 @ 5:20 pmJD,
No,I’m not defending Lisa – however I dont think or automatically assume that Miller is a conservative either – anyone who is a lawer and West point grad who cant find employment, takes welfare and unemployment, tries to seal records of misconduct wont answer questions on his background etc lies about his apponent deliberately during a campaign to narrowly win an election and now finds himself in third place in some questionable polls (I still am finding that hard to believe) has the support of millions of dollars and Sarah
At some point JD, maybe Alaskans dont want miller after all – but like I said Sarah invested her rep into this risked all those millions in speaking fees – and we will see in 4 or so days
Also, please point out any corrupt establishment that Lisa is? She is senator from a state that is more blue than most people realize
EricPWJohnson (2d1c68) — 10/30/2010 @ 7:41 pmSame old gibberish from you.
JD (c8c1d2) — 10/30/2010 @ 8:33 pmWell for starters, you begin with this
http://www.gliffy.com/publish/2266883/
ian cormac (6709ab) — 10/30/2010 @ 8:52 pmSome people have stated that she has a right to run as a write-in. Then, since I am also an Alaskan who is eligible, do I not also have the right to run as a write-in as well? As a person who got my name on the write-in list, I will say that my reasons are not to suppress the vote for any Alaskan, but to counteract the court ruling that was based in politics and not in law. We have never been allowed a write-in list at the polls until this year. The rules should not be changed to give one person an advantage that she should not have. A write-in is just that: They are not on the ballot, which means if you want to vote for them, you better remember their name when you get to the voting booth.
akpud (ed61b3) — 10/30/2010 @ 10:04 pmAnd Mr. Fagan has not been fired, but suspended, to my knowledge. I will say that the actions of the people working in the Murkowski campaign have been truly disgusting. Whether or not you agree with Mr. Fagan, he has the same first amendment rights as anyone else and no campiagn should engage in bully tactics to silence dissent. I know not everyone is going to agree with this post, but I did want to give a take on how some of us up here view this and why maybe some voters did what they did by signing up to become a write in. Thanks.
JD,
Since again you wont give any proof of your claims that Lisa is an establishment corrupt politician –
I guess gibberish is in the eye of the beholder now isnt it?
IF you have concrete information that the Senator from Alaska is corrupt I would greatly encourage you to run, not walk to the FBI office in Chicago – I’m sure they would be willing to listen to you at length..
EricPWJohnson (2d1c68) — 10/30/2010 @ 10:07 pmThe last time the FBI was in Alaska, they were ‘babysitting’ William Allen, the frost bitten Moriarty with the realm, who’s lack of credibility
ian cormac (6709ab) — 10/30/2010 @ 10:26 pmwas being denied, while evidence was manufactured against the late Sen. Stevens, in order to put this DNC factotum, Begich, ultimately they want a whole in one with McAdams with Lisa running interference
Ian
I am not following – sorry – JD, amde a claim that he has information that she is corrupt – I guess the civic thing to do as well as the conservative thing to do is to go to the FBI and tell them what you know – not just spout it off on a blog
But that’s just me..
EricPWJohnson (2d1c68) — 10/30/2010 @ 10:30 pmYou’re from New Orleans right, even working for Connick you could never have been that naive
ian cormac (6709ab) — 10/30/2010 @ 10:46 pmIan
No actually Harry had a good way of keeping people from making false claims – he sent them an appointment notice for an interview – sitting at the open mic session as we called it at city council finally drowned out alot of that
JD is making the very direct claim of knowledge of corruption – he should either – not be telling things that he knows are not true – or he should be reporting them to law enforcement imediately
EricPWJohnson (2d1c68) — 10/31/2010 @ 2:14 amSort of like claiming Breitbart will be indicted?
daleyrocks (940075) — 10/31/2010 @ 6:03 amBased on…………….
daleyrocks (940075) — 10/31/2010 @ 6:04 amRE comment 34: “That is not correct — That law isnt 50 years old — First of all ALASKA has barely been a state for 50 years…”
Are you under the impression that Alaska had no laws before it became a state?
I don’t know, myself, how old the law inb question is. But Alsaka probably has many laws still on the books from its Territorial days.
gwjd (032bef) — 10/31/2010 @ 9:52 amAn interesting discussion is worth comment. I think that you should write more on this topic, it might not be a taboo subject but generally people are ot enough to speak on such topics. To the next. Cheers
cheap e cigarette (8eace2) — 6/15/2011 @ 9:31 am