About
Learn More about our progressive online community for the Granite State.

Create an account today (it's free and easy) and get started!
Menu

Make a New Account

Username:

Password:



Forget your username or password?


Search




Advanced Search


The Masthead
Managing Editor
Mike Hoefer

Editors
elwood
susanthe
 William Tucker
The Roll, Etc.
Prog Blogs, Orgs & Alumni
Bank Slate
Betsy Devine
birch paper
Democracy for NH
Granite State Progress
Mike Caulfield
Miscellany Blue
Pickup Patriots
Re-BlueNH
Still No Going Back
Susan the Bruce
New Hampshire Labor News
Chaz Proulx: Right Wing Watch

Politicos & Punditry
The Burt Cohen Show
John Gregg
Landrigan
Pindell
Primary Monitor
Scala
Schoenberg
Spiliotes

Campaigns, Et Alia.
NH-Gov
- Maggie Hassan
NH-01
- Andrew Hosmer
- Carol Shea-Porter
- Joanne Dowdell
NH-02
- Ann McLane Kuster

ActBlue Hampshire
NHDP
DCCC
DSCC
DNC

National
Balloon Juice
billmon
Congress Matters
DailyKos
Digby
Hold Fast
Eschaton
FiveThirtyEight
MyDD
Open Left
Senate Guru
Swing State Project
Talking Points Memo

50 State Blog Network
Alabama
Arizona
California
Colorado
Connecticut
Delaware
Florida
Idaho
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
Louisiana
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts
Michigan
Minnesota
Missouri
Missouri
Montana
Nebraska
Nevada
New Hampshire
New Jersey
New Mexico
New York
North Carolina
North Dakota
Ohio
Oklahoma
Oregon
Rhode Island
Tennessee
Texas
Texas
Utah
Vermont
Virginia
Washington
West Virginia
Wisconsin

Peter Burling's comments about lobbying and the Kuster-Swett race

by: Putney Swope

Thu Aug 26, 2010 at 14:04:54 PM EDT
The following letter to the editor appeared in today's Union-Leader (not available online):

To the Editor: The race between Ann McLane Kuster and Katrina Swett in the 2nd Congressional District is not about who was a lobbyist and who not. The facts are self-evident. The question is: What does that tell us about what they might do in Congress?

In my years in Concord, Kuster lobbied consistently to defeat our efforts at health care reform. She said the market should provide needed change. In that, she was wrong. But what would she do in Congress if her former employees wanted to gut reform?

Swett, to my knowledge, never lobbied anyone, and strongly supports reforms backed by this administration.

In any case, the winner of their contest will be so much better than Charlie Bass, who has abandoned every principled stand his party ever espoused.

Peter Burling
Cornish
Putney Swope :: Peter Burling's comments about lobbying and the Kuster-Swett race
Tags: (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email
Peter Burling's comments about lobbying and the Kuster-Swett race | 136 comments
"Swett, to my knowledge, never lobbied anyone..." just co-owned a lobbying firm n/t (4.00 / 2)
 
That is irrelevant compared to his comment about Kuster's lobbying (0.00 / 0)
"In my years in Concord, Kuster lobbied consistently to defeat our efforts at health care reform. She said the market should provide needed change. In that, she was wrong. But what would she do in Congress if her former employees wanted to gut reform?"
[ Parent ]
Raytheon n/t (4.00 / 1)

[ Parent ]
PhRMA is more heinous than Raytheon (0.00 / 0)
And did Swett actually lobby for Raytheon or did she just a partner in the firm?

There is a difference.

[ Parent ]
Did she cash the checks? (4.00 / 1)
Really, Putney. Is the pimp better than the prostitute?
(Pre-emptive clarification- I'm not calling anyone a night walker. This is a metaphor.)

Who is the grand arbitrator that decides which special interest is better than the other?

"Ill writers are usually the sharpest censors." - John Dryden

[ Parent ]
By that standard. . . . (4.00 / 2)
Annie is a lobbyist for RJ Reynolds Tobacco -- a major account of Rath Young and Pignatelli, of which Kuster is a leading lobbyist and shareholder.

Of course, Katrina never lobbied for Raytheon (nor, for that matter, did anyone at Swett Associates).  If she had, you would have publicly available evidence to site as to legislation that she tried to influence.

[ Parent ]
Some dodge (0.00 / 0)
Katrina cashed the checks. Who's checks? Who knows. She stayed off the official paperwork, except for the letterhead. But her name is on the payroll! Thank you.

"Ill writers are usually the sharpest censors." - John Dryden
[ Parent ]
Do we need middlemen in the sex trade? (4.00 / 1)
A pimp is a middleman who not infrequently uses threats to get his "cut."  A prostitute is a service provider.  Is a nurse better than a health insurance agent?  You bet.
[ Parent ]
Missiles are cheaper in Canada (4.00 / 1)
Would either candidate support importation of Canadian missiles?
[ Parent ]
"to my knowledge," (0.00 / 0)
Peter's qualification is so compelling. I guess he has enough plausible deniability to protect his reputation from further potential revelations.

Why even write this?

He is right about this:  "the winner of their contest will be so much better than Charlie Bass, who has abandoned every principled stand his party ever espoused."

"Ill writers are usually the sharpest censors." - John Dryden

It shouldn't be a contest. They're both being interviewed for a job. (0.00 / 0)
Each should be speaking, like John Alden, for herself.
[ Parent ]
We're Not Electing The Next "American Idol" (4.00 / 1)
I think Peter Burling is a good Democrat and he makes good points.  I will say, as someone without a candidate choice in the 2nd CD race, that both Ann Kuster and Katrina Swett are great candidates.  Lobbying is an honest profession, and in that profession sometimes you have to take positions -- just like in law -- and offer points of view that might not be your own, but you're doing it on behalf of a client.  

Since both Swett and Kuster are great choices, the dialogue in that race should, IMHO, center on what each will do starting the moment the winner stands next to Carol Shea-Porter and is sworn in as a Member of Congress.  

Hopefully we're not going to get into a situation where everything someone has done in his or her "past life" is used to disqualify them in politics.  Otherwise, we end up having people who haven't done much to rock the apple cart elected.  Just because you might make a good candidate for American Idol doesn't mean you make a great candidate for political office.  

Mostly Agree (0.00 / 0)
You say: he makes good points

I say:

He is right about this:  "the winner of their contest will be so much better than Charlie Bass, who has abandoned every principled stand his party ever espoused."

Peter Burling must not know about this:
Exhibit 5, Page 12
Photobucket


"Ill writers are usually the sharpest censors." - John Dryden

[ Parent ]
In The Interest of Full Disclosure Jack... (0.00 / 0)
Ann Kuster's Lobbying Clients since 1990 -- (compiled from records on file with NH Secretary of State)

African Development Bank
AIG-VALIC
Hoffmann-La Roche Pharmaceuticals
American Frozen Foods
American Health Centers
American Republic Insurance
Bedford Ambulatory Surgery Center
BMI
Bonnie CLAC
Browning Ferris Industries
Central Ambulatory Care Center
Chicago Board Options Exchange
Child and Family Services of New Hampshire
City of Rochester
Dartmouth College
Dartmouth Medical School
Environmental Systems, Inc.
Fidelity Investments
First American Real Estate
Focus Tamworth
Harvard Pilgrim Health Insurance
Health Dialogue
Hitchcock Clinic/Lahey Hitchcock
Home Health Care Assoc. of NH
IMS America Health Care Consulting
Investment Company Institute
Keane Tracers
Lakes Region Community Service
Lifecare Services of NH
Matthew Thornton Health Insurance
Medco Health Care Solutions
Merck Pharmaceuticals
NARAL NH
National Association of Security Dealers
New England Cable TV Association
NH Dietetic Association
NH Independent Schools
NH College & University Council
NH Water Well Association
Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America
Property Casuality Insurers
Riverbend Community Health Center
West Group
Woodbridge Financial Corporation  

"Never doubt that a small group of dedicated people can change the world...it's all that ever has."
~Margaret Mead

[ Parent ]
Is it the gallows then, John? (4.00 / 1)
What should we do with these unwashed lobbyists we have on our hands, eh?

Write in Fernald?

"Ill writers are usually the sharpest censors." - John Dryden

[ Parent ]
Harold Stassen? n/t (4.00 / 1)


note to close readers: this might be sarcastic so think twice before reading to candidates for use in their attacks on each other
[ Parent ]
I miss Harold. n/t (4.00 / 2)


They. Don't. Care.
We do.
Rinse, repeat.
[ Parent ]
and your point is ? (0.00 / 0)
Last I looked, a Redress of Grievances is protected under the First Amendment.

http://law.jrank.org/pages/834...

Lobbying involves the advocacy of an interest that is affected, actually or potentially, by the decisions of government leaders. Individuals and interest groups alike can lobby governments, and governments can even lobby each other. The practice of lobbying is considered so essential to the proper functioning of the U.S. government that it is specifically protected by the FIRST AMENDMENT  to the U.S. Constitution: "Congress shall make no law ... abridging ... the right of the people peaceably ... to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."


I don't hear you or Peter doing anything but bloviating. Are you also in support of repeal of the First Amendment ? Have I missed the myraid of Bills you and he put forward to end the practice ? This is election year politicking, to try and hide the lack of a progressive record for the hawkish Dr. Swett.

All the human rights wallpaper in the world doesn't change the fact that she was absent without leave on Marriage Equality, arguably the most critical state level human and civil rights movement of out time.

Let's talk Afghanistan, the Bush Tax Cuts, the failed Bush War in Iraq, all of which your candidate supports or supported until converted into a 'modern' candidate.
Drop the bullshit attacks and deal with something that will be in purview of the congress at least. Has the 2nd CD race become so petty as to devolve into your settling scores for past associations and legislative ineptitude in Concord?

http://nhfactcheck.com/lobbying/

Swett was a registered federal lobbyist for a "one of Wall Street's3 best short-sellers." She owned "Katrina Swett &Associates," a federal lobbying firm4 where she was the President and was paid to lobby for Wall Street. For 15 years, she and her husband have provided "Government Relations"5 work at Swett & Associates for many big multinational corporations, including one of the top outsourcers of American jobs6.

Katrina Swett has been attacking Annie Kuster in order to disguise her own background as a Wall Street lobbyist.
Annie Kuster

Swett has7 repeatedly "implied that Kuster's work involved lobbying in Washington," which is false, and she has accused Kuster of working for clients that Kuster never8 worked for at all.

In fact, Annie Kuster has never been a Washington lobbyist.  She worked at the state level, helping businesses and nonprofits in New Hampshire work with state legislators on projects like creating the Medication Bridge9, which has distributed free prescription medicine to over 16,000 New Hampshire seniors and families in need, and the UNIQUE college savings plan10 that tens of thousands of families have used to save for college.

Read more: Lobbying - Should Lobbyists Be Strictly Regulated?, Further Readings - Act, Congress, Federal, Government, and Law http://law.jrank.org/pages/834...


note to close readers: this might be sarcastic so think twice before reading to candidates for use in their attacks on each other

[ Parent ]
Full Disclosure (4.00 / 1)
The site Jon references above is a Kuster site, not an independent site, as the nhfactcheck title might imply.

"Never doubt that a small group of dedicated people can change the world...it's all that ever has."
~Margaret Mead

[ Parent ]
Citing independent sources (4.00 / 1)
The "Kuster site," http://nhfactcheck.com/, is what the new media savvy call, a rapid response site.

When opposing campaigns rely on lies and distortions of others records, or their on for that matter, nimble campaigns provide grassroots supporters with facts to combat the smears, ect.

As Annie does have a large network of grassroot support out there talking to their neighbors (and so on) in NH-02, this site, http://nhfactcheck.com/, helps them separate fact from fiction.

The site provides proof from independent sources.

Like this:

She breaks with her party and favors legal limits on damage lawsuits for medical malpractice because the lack of them, she said, are forcing doctors to order too many tests to keep themselves out of court.

"I do think we need to have tort reform," Swett said. "There is a lot of defensive medicine being practiced."

-snip
Swett was the 2002 Democratic nominee for the 2nd District seat, losing to then-incumbent Charles Bass, who is running for the GOP nomination this fall.

Back then, she supported the Bush tax cuts and also backed the invasion of Iraq to remove Saddam Hussein.

John, as you are focused on disclosure, ask Katrina about her role at Swett Associates in representing CGS, a firm that promotes itself as a "Top 20 Training Outsourcing Company." Um, John? Outsourcing? Isn't that related to moving middle class jobs overseas? Partly? Maybe, mostly?

But that's OK, right? Because Katrina didn't formally "lobby" for CGS or anything like that, as far I can tell. But she was a VP of Swett Associates while they represented CGS (the outsourcing firm.) And, since profits are fungible, I can say that Katrina profited from outsourcing, can't we? She cashed the checks, no?

Nevermind that, according to Open Secrets CGS higher ups, have been kind to Katrina's political ambitions. Those checks, part of the out-of-state money that Swett relies on, have certainly been cashed.

I know you and Peter Burling are very concerned about the middle class, which at least you and I are members of.  Could you do us a solid and look into this? With only 3 weeks to go, we need to make sure everything is on the up and up.  It sucks to find out about "honest mistakes" and "misunderstandings" late in the game.

Rapid Response, yo!

"Ill writers are usually the sharpest censors." - John Dryden

[ Parent ]
So What You Are Saying... (4.00 / 1)
Is that my statement was correct.

Yea, i get rapid response Jack, but in the end it is the "facts" through the Kuster campaign lens.

Campaign sites have broad latitude to have sites like this. Since we are all interested in facts here, it is important to understand that this is a campaign site. Nothing more, nothing less.

I appreciate that by you choosing not to address this fact in your post, that you have in fact confirmed my post. Thank you.

"Never doubt that a small group of dedicated people can change the world...it's all that ever has."
~Margaret Mead

[ Parent ]
I am more than happy (0.00 / 0)
To demonstrate, that out there on the intertubes, is a place where third party, independent sources are available to refute those assertions made through the "lens" of the Swett campaign.

Note: No source is quoted, that cannot by linked to. It may be easier for the casual lurker to breeze through BH, taking what they choose from it. But, they may also choose to follow the links provided, testing the veracity of the content.

And your thoughts about Swett's client, CGS?  

"Ill writers are usually the sharpest censors." - John Dryden

[ Parent ]
Still seeking your help... (0.00 / 0)
finding independent sources backing up the assertions that "Swett supported tax cuts for the wealthy".

Good effort though trying to change the subject.

Remember, we are talking about a campaign web site of teh Kuster campaign. My only point here was to point out that it is in fact a campaign site, not and independent site as the URL suggests.You are the one "chowing down" on the red herring.

"Never doubt that a small group of dedicated people can change the world...it's all that ever has."
~Margaret Mead

[ Parent ]
"she supported the Bush tax cuts" (0.00 / 0)
That is the quote I provided above. Those are not my words. Those were written by Landigran. Go after him, if you like. Blaming the media is "politics as usual." I make a concerted effort to avoid that trap. Annie, definately, does.

The words you put in quotations:

"Swett supported tax cuts for the wealthy".

Are not mine. Not on this thread. If you comb my comments, I may have said that somewhere, because it is part of the public record. I assume you are not quoting me because you would have linked that quote to my comment.

Now the two quotes are slightly different. Most Democrats accept that "Bush tax cuts" and "tax cuts for the wealthy" mean the same thing. It all kinda goes over my head, as I, like you, am not wealthy. Katrina is.

PS. I am not poor, btw. I have a modest middle class existence. Of more importance, I have a healthy, loving family. I am rich with friends and other intangibles. These blessings are immunized against the meddlings of Bush or any other.

"Ill writers are usually the sharpest censors." - John Dryden

[ Parent ]
You're right Jack... (4.00 / 1)
Those are the words of the Kuster campaign:

Katrina Swett supported the Bush tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans
. Unfortunately, the link is to the landrigan article you referenced which does not support the assertion.

In a non-campaign year, I might agree with you that "Bush tax cuts" and "tax cuts for the wealthy" are synonymous. The campaigns (both) have so nuanced this issue, that there are miles between the two terms, at least in my mind.


I, like you, am not wealthy. Katrina is
and so is Ann.

Again, a campaign should not be given a pass when they set up a "rapid response" site to pretend that the information is factual. It may be, but it is still a campaign website and the information is and should be subject to vetting.



"Never doubt that a small group of dedicated people can change the world...it's all that ever has."
~Margaret Mead

[ Parent ]
Yes, subject to vetting (4.00 / 1)
Like all information sources.

Automatically impugned, no. You don't seem to be denying that Katrina supported tax cuts for the wealthy, no matter what they were called.

This comment is on a blog and subject to vetting.


[ Parent ]
Inside Baseball (0.00 / 0)
Let's talk, just us girls.

Ya know we are playing a game a equivalency. Which is unfortunate because the issues are more important.

But your candidate is playing games, so I take it upon myself to drag this all out. You have been very helpful.

Both Annie and Katrina are lobbyists. There are some differences. Annie was local and Katrina was national. Annie was employed by a lobbying firm. Katrina had her name on the letterhead. On and on, we can go.

Both Annie and Katrina are wealthy. But we know, based on the Kennedy & Roosevelt models, empathy for the working class can come from even the highest classes in America. So how much their 1040 reveals is not all that important.

But John, I don't see Annie enlisting folks to wage the class war across the state. You, specifically, made it a point to prop Swett up based on her empathy for middle class issues. Yet, above we have her aiding CGS and their "outsourcing" efforts.

I also see Swett fluffing up her simple beginnings. She isn't fabricating anything. That is not my charge. She is playing it up because it offsets her wealth and it leads into her international sensibilities. I, and this is my opinion, think the issues that you care about will get less attention from a Rep.Swett than will issues related to the grand scheme.

"Ill writers are usually the sharpest censors." - John Dryden

[ Parent ]
Evidence Please (0.00 / 0)
Yet, above we have her aiding CGS and their "outsourcing" efforts

Jack, if you can find me a single scintilla of evidence that Katrina Swett aided outsourcing in any way (or "lobbied" for anti-progressive legislation of any kind), then I will have the New York Yankees logo tattooed on my ass.

I won't TR this, because, like me, sometimes your passion for your candidate gets the better of you.  And we all make mistakes.

But you know better than to say something that is patently untrue.  And this is.

[ Parent ]
And, yes. . . (4.00 / 2)
Jack, if you can find me a single scintilla of evidence that Katrina Swett aided outsourcing in any way (or "lobbied" for anti-progressive legislation of any kind), then I will have the New York Yankees logo tattooed on my ass.

I would be Bresler's twin.  Seriously, what would be the odds of Blue Hampshire featuring two short, outspoken, and somewhat eccentric Jewish Democrats with Yankees logos tattooed on their asses?

That should give you all the incentive you need.

[ Parent ]
Note the word "aiding" (0.00 / 0)
I choose that word specifically because, while CGS was a client, Katrina was part of Swett Associates.

So she did aid CGS, as her name is part of the package at the firm. I'm sure Dick brings a lot to the firm, but so does Katrina.

Now, you may argue that she did not lobby on their behalf and in a court of law, you would be right. But she is certainly part of the team.

The Red Sox take the field with 9 men. But we know that organization is made up of hundreds. Of course, Katrina is much closer to being the John Henry, in my metaphor, than Big Papi.



"Ill writers are usually the sharpest censors." - John Dryden

[ Parent ]
No Evidence -- Because Katrina Swett NEVER lobbied on behalf of outsourcing (0.00 / 0)
Yet, above we have her aiding CGS and their "outsourcing" efforts

You were wrong, Jack. That never happened.  Not by your "court of law" standard, or any other.

My Yankees tattoo offer still stands.  Just find me a time when Katrina Swett attempted to influence anti-progressive legislation on behalf of corporate interests (for money).  Will even add A-Rod's signature to the other cheek.

[ Parent ]
CGS was a client of Swett Associates (0.00 / 0)
Whatever CGS paid them to do, it helped CGS do WHAT they do, which is
"A key component of the company's growth strategy is its Contact Center Solution (CCS). CGS is pursuing a strategy to expand its outsourcing business, specifically as it relates to customer care and finance and accounting."

CGS's higher up's campaign contributions to Katrina Swett.

D,
You can fall back on the word "lobby" all you like, as a distraction because I did not say lobby. But Katrina aided and abbetted CGS in some fashion. And she certainly profitted by the fees that they paid.

I have no inclination to plea bargain with you. Swett played a game of branding and it back fired.

Refuse to admit the smoking gun 'til your fingers fall off. Katrina Swett was a registered lobbyist.

"Ill writers are usually the sharpest censors." - John Dryden

[ Parent ]
Derriere remains unthreatened (0.00 / 0)
Jack, if you can find me a single scintilla of evidence that Katrina Swett aided outsourcing in any way (or "lobbied" for anti-progressive legislation of any kind), then I will have the New York Yankees logo tattooed on my ass.
 
[ Parent ]
Between us girls... (4.00 / 2)
You, specifically, made it a point to prop Swett up based on her empathy for middle class issues.


for which I was attacked by you and again.

For the record Jack, I chose to support Katrina because she has a far better understanding of the struggles of working families.


You don't agree, your perogative. but don't forget, I have known both of these women for about 8 years. Not only on the campaign trail, but in the legislature, as activists, etc. My understanding of these women is from all of these experiences. How they carried themselves as people, as candidates; how they spoke to the issues, how they interacted with voters. My choice was and still is clear. Katrina is better prepared, better able and more willing to fight for the causes that are important to me, and that I contructed my campaign around.

You are correct about the Kennedy legacy. As a South Shore boy, I grew up with that legacy. We just disagree which candidate carries that mantle.

So Katrina's name was on a form, that means she supported outsourcing? Tremendous leap of faith there Jack.

So Riddle me this batman, what does it say about the Kuster campaign when her clients and contributors make outsourcing a game?


You are right that we can play this game all day. I don't believe that it serves us, the candidates or the party. There has been enough mud slung here and between the campaigns. Perhaps we should let the mud dry awhile.

"Never doubt that a small group of dedicated people can change the world...it's all that ever has."
~Margaret Mead

[ Parent ]
I'm ready to give it a rest (0.00 / 0)
It's been a long slog.

I entered this thread with some objectives.
- Note that Burling's statement came with an out, to cover his ass.
- Negate the branding effort by Swett's campaign. Both candidates have been lobbyists.
- Highlight that a majority of NH State Reps have endorsed Kuster. This directly counters claims that her lobbying efforts are deleterious to progressive causes in NH.

You will see in this diary a discussion about the Obama-Clinton primary. From those comments, you can surmise that it is never personal with me.

I'm willing to stop here.


"Ill writers are usually the sharpest censors." - John Dryden

[ Parent ]
You say you'll give it a rest... (4.00 / 1)
but then open new lines of thought:
This directly counters claims that her lobbying efforts are deleterious to progressive causes in NH.


It makes no comment on this whatsoever.

If you really are willing to stop here, then I'm all in. But I too will continue to defend my chosen candidate.  

"Never doubt that a small group of dedicated people can change the world...it's all that ever has."
~Margaret Mead

[ Parent ]
A rock solid line (0.00 / 0)
but not new
This would be a good point to mention (4.00 / 2)
There are 123 Dem state reps in NH-02. 72 are supporting Annie Kuster.
I'm sure some conjecture could be had on how that relates to the qualities of Swett and her high profile endorsers. Maybe, the 123 Dems could better state their case. The simple bulk, a clear majority, does say quite a lot.

It certainly doesn't speak well to Burling's charge over "our efforts," does it?

www.KusterforCongress.com - www.paulhodesforsenate.com

www.nikitsongas.com - www.devalpatrick.com
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

by: Jack Mitchell @ Thu Aug 26, 2010 at 23:12:14 PM EDT

John, I am Infantry. I sleep in my gear, ready to roll. My offer to give it a rest still stands. However, if Reagan gave us a single nugget of wisdom it was "Trust, but verify."

Ne Desit Virtus

"Ill writers are usually the sharpest censors." - John Dryden

[ Parent ]
PPS Comment on CGS? n/t (0.00 / 0)


"Ill writers are usually the sharpest censors." - John Dryden
[ Parent ]
This cracks me up (4.00 / 1)
Your comment had me thinking about Landigran. So over to the Telegraph I click.
Swett fired the first shot at Kuster's experience as a Concord lobbyist for the firm of former Attorney General Tom Rath.

The Kuster camp slapped back that Swett was registered as a lobbyist through her firm Katrina Swett and Associates on behalf of a few of its clients, including the late Meyer Berman, a noted short-seller of stocks on Wall Street. Swett insisted she never actually lobbied anyone in Washington.

I laughed 'cause it was quite the, 'I never inhaled' moment. Oh, and Landigran confirms:

For The Record: Who Started It
by: Jack Mitchell
Thu Jul 29, 2010 at 11:10:53 AM EDT

Landigran adds:

Meanwhile, the Kuster camp unveiled a new website dedicated to showing the contrast between the two candidates on abortion rights, Iraq and Afghanistan, and Bush tax cuts.

The link is http://nhfactcheck.com .

So murky. ;v)



"Ill writers are usually the sharpest censors." - John Dryden

[ Parent ]
Dartmouth! n/t (4.00 / 1)

[ Parent ]
Annie gets plus points for that one! :) (4.00 / 2)

[ Parent ]
Lobbyists and representatives are middlemen. (0.00 / 0)
So, the question ought to be "were Swett and Kuster any good at their jobs or did they just take the money and run?
[ Parent ]
What bothers is me is the self-righteous attitude of Kuster's supporters (3.00 / 4)
They were both registered lobbyists.

But Annie actively lobbied for some good, but also for some evil interests, PhRMA being the most evil that I'm aware of.

It is the avoidance of Annie's supporters to acknowledge this that really bothers me. Annie could have said no to working for PhRMA - but she didn't and if Peter B is correct she lobbied against health care reform, which IMHO is particularly heinous.

Katrina owned a company that lobbied. Her supporters do not deny it.

It is the attitude of Annie's supporters on these pages that Katrina is evil while sticking their heads in ground and ignoring Annie's work for PhRMA (and against health care reform) that really bothers me.

If Annie does not address this now, then that chameleon and weasel Charlie Bass will force her to do so.

Evil? (4.00 / 1)
Hardly.

I'll informed? Mismanaged? Hypocritical, at worst.

I'd like you to show me where I have denied Annie's vocation. How about you find a euphemism I've applied. I may have tried one of those. Kill me.

When Katrina took on Charlie Bass, how did that work out?


"Ill writers are usually the sharpest censors." - John Dryden

[ Parent ]
Please give me the link to your comment addressing this (0.00 / 0)

[ Parent ]
Addressing what? (0.00 / 0)
I've had a few addressing the word "lobbyist", but none of them deny Annie being one.

You have lumped "Annie supporters" together. I'm one. Show me where I've done as you have accused.

If I were to accuse Swett supporters of being all breathy with indignation, I can easily do that.

But it's not their fault. Swett's communications team is a wreck. Her surrogates are disjointed and her supporters are left trying to cobble together a talking point.

I know this is process stuff. Boring. But as a "poliphile," I tend to judge a potential office holder on how they run their campaign. It's an indicator of how they would run their congressional office.

"Ill writers are usually the sharpest censors." - John Dryden

[ Parent ]
Has any Annie supporter discussed her work for PhRMA in BH... (0.00 / 0)
or anywhere else?
[ Parent ]
Did they offer it? (4.00 / 1)
Not sure. I wouldn't because I worked that out in my head over a year ago. I know it has been discussed because it has been raised here. So yes, they have discussed it.

Something to consider, if you where to use the Google search field over to the left here on BH, try typing in "Lessig" or "YouStreet."

Note, that the promotion of major campaign finance reform efforts comes from Mike Hoefer, John Bresler & me. Odd, don't ya think, that WE would all be supporters of Annie.

Are we stupid? Naive? Or maybe, just maybe, this campaign by Swett/Kaufman is blown out of proportion?

Swett played this card. Not us.

With Kuster leading in endorsements and local support, the Swett campaign may have drawn attention to Kuster's lobbying ties in an attempt to get traction, said political analyst Dean Spiliotes. But once the bouts of criticism have begun, he said, they will likely continue up to the primary.

"At some point you forget who the initial instigator was, and it becomes this tactical back-and-forth between the campaigns," Spiliotes said.



"Ill writers are usually the sharpest censors." - John Dryden
[ Parent ]
That is not directly addressing the PhRMA problem (4.00 / 1)

[ Parent ]
I just can't (4.00 / 1)
If this is what you mean, accept that Annie Kuster is equivalent to the "PhRMA problem."

Is that where you are going with this? Annie = PhRMA?

"Ill writers are usually the sharpest censors." - John Dryden

[ Parent ]
Peter Burling (4.00 / 2)
When New Hampshire's foremost (and most passionately progressive) legislative leader from the past quarter centure says this:

In my years in Concord, Kuster lobbied consistently to defeat our efforts at health care reform. She said the market should provide needed change. In that, she was wrong.

. . . then that should raise alarm bells.

[ Parent ]
and being a lobbyist for an arms manufacturer shouldn't? n/t (0.00 / 0)

[ Parent ]
. . . which Katrina Swett wasn't, of course n/t (0.00 / 0)

[ Parent ]
oh that's right...Raytheon makes pet supplies. n/t (4.00 / 2)

[ Parent ]
Actually, they make ray guns, one of which LA county has acquired (4.00 / 1)
to incapacitate jail inmates that might be fighting by scorching their skin.  Since the Pentagon seems to have rejected this weapon, it's now being sold domestically.  The original purpose was "crowd control."
Wonder what the candidates' position on anti-personnel weapons such as hellfire missiles is.
[ Parent ]
The "to my knowledge" guy (0.00 / 0)
I know Burling is one of the good guys, even if he was with Edwards in '08.

But his ringing conditional qualification is hardly moving.

Who is this "our" he refers to. The quote makes a nice sound byte, but it can't make it through the noise of the Swett campaign's hypocrisy.

Fact is, Annie contributed to the greater good in multiple ways. I don't blame any surrogate for parroting the given talking points, but they ring hollow.

"At some point you forget who the initial instigator was, and it becomes this tactical back-and-forth between the campaigns," Spiliotes said.

Yawn.

"Ill writers are usually the sharpest censors." - John Dryden

[ Parent ]
name his achievements? (0.00 / 0)
can't think of one...but that's just the top of the mind awareness issue...I am sure there must be some....

note to close readers: this might be sarcastic so think twice before reading to candidates for use in their attacks on each other
[ Parent ]
A Little Overboard DD (0.00 / 0)
In your purple description of Peter.

Don't suppose your glowing praise could have anything to do with his support for your candidate?  

No'm Sayn?

[ Parent ]
No, Burt (0.00 / 0)
It has more to do with Peter's unparalleled leadership on education funding, choice, and tax reform for more than 30 years, as well as his service as an able and progressive leader (selected by his Democratic colleagues) in both the House and Senate.  
[ Parent ]
This would be a good point to mention (4.00 / 2)
There are 123 Dem state reps in NH-02. 72 are supporting Annie Kuster.

I'm sure some conjecture could be had on how that relates to the qualities of Swett and her high profile endorsers. Maybe, the 123 Dems could better state their case. The simple bulk, a clear majority, does say quite a lot.

It certainly doesn't speak well to Burling's charge over "our efforts," does it?


"Ill writers are usually the sharpest censors." - John Dryden

[ Parent ]
great point Jack (0.00 / 0)
I don't think that's a bad way to analyze the race. "Enough is enough". "Get Real".

note to close readers: this might be sarcastic so think twice before reading to candidates for use in their attacks on each other
[ Parent ]
I learned to fish in Sandwich, NH (4.00 / 1)
Brookies, in the Cold River.

You gotta play 'em, if they got some fight in 'em. It's more fun. Plus, they shake the hook, if ya don't wear 'em down.

"Ill writers are usually the sharpest censors." - John Dryden

[ Parent ]
I recommend to undecided voters (4.00 / 3)
that they simply measure the ratio of positive and negative diaries and comments from each camp.

If I were buying a car, and the Chevy Chevrolet salesman spent 85% of his time telling me that Hondas suck, I might keep looking.

Yeah, that's right (1.00 / 4)
Anyone who reads this blog can see the waves of front page anti-Kuster diaries on the Blue Hampshire.  Right.  And Bristol Palin was invited to join Dancing on the Stars because of her talent and intellect.

I have been the most active pro-Swett blogger here, and I have contributed exactly two diaries criticizing Annie's record (one in direct response to the "Swett Opposes Marriage Equality" slur, which practically shut down the Swett campaign for several hours due to protests from those misled about her faux position).

Two diaries.  That's a slow Katrina-bashing day for Dean and Brother Bresler.

[ Parent ]
You've been half stepping, yo (4.00 / 1)
That's why they rolled out Peter "to my knowledge" Burling.



"Ill writers are usually the sharpest censors." - John Dryden

[ Parent ]
twisted reality my friend (4.00 / 1)
Your sensitivity is misplaced and over amped. In most of the country, by just saying the name that will not pass my lips... the Sr. Senator from CT's former National Co-Chair is automatically disqualified with a yelp. I've heard more than twice, 'that alone disqualifies her'. Get off your high horse and dig it, you're coming in dead last so you attack the character and livelihood of one of our longest standing awardees, endorsed by every major Woman's group(, for whom she never lobbied), delegate to the Democratic National convention in 2004 and 2008, co founder with Peggo Hodes of Woman for Obama in NH...yes the very same President Obama who signed into Law historic health care reform. As a super volunteer, from the very night of his great speech at the 2004 Convention, she worked tirelessly to elect the first African American President. Yes the terrible lobbyist Ann Kuster has a dark side...she volunteers tirelessly for Liberal Causes and helps to pass Health Care Reform, without getting paid. Truly evil stuff.

And she was there in support of the passage of Marriage Equality.  

note to close readers: this might be sarcastic so think twice before reading to candidates for use in their attacks on each other

[ Parent ]
They call that "ratings abuse", JB (0.00 / 0)

[ Parent ]
No, you earned it. (2.00 / 4)
Two diaries.  That's a slow Katrina-bashing day for Dean and Brother Bresler.

That's an easily-checked lie slurring Jon.

Stop lying, or I'll request your banning.

[ Parent ]
Ban away (0.00 / 1)
Then no one will be left to acknowledge the constant wave of front page anti-Swett diaries on this site during the past three months.  You'll have no one to dispute your fiction that Swett supporters are the ones populating the blog with waves of negative diaries.  (Or, for that matter, to call you on your selective attacks re: endorsing Republicans.)

You can try to intimidate me all you want.  Call me names if that makes you happy.  I'm not going to stop calling out hypocrisy when I see it.

For the record, I counted 14 anti-Swett diaries posted on Blue Hampshire by Dean and JB (admittedly, the majority by Dean, although the Emperor has picked up the pace of late) in the past two months.  Which is their perogative.  But it certainly puts the lie to your assertion that the Swett campaign is the aggressor here.

[ Parent ]
And, trust me, that's extremely conservative counting on my part n/t (0.00 / 0)

[ Parent ]
No banning, please. (4.00 / 3)
Beanbag? Nope!

"Ill writers are usually the sharpest censors." - John Dryden
[ Parent ]
I will be "truth-squadding: Dartmouth Dem's (4.00 / 2)
postings for a while.

If he continues to post falsehoods as frequently as I believe he is doing, I will strongly recommend banning.

[ Parent ]
Go for it (2.00 / 2)
I'll "truth squad" your postings, too.  And when you mischaracterize the actions of Katrina Swett or her supporters, or engage in blatant double standards, I will call you on that as well.

You are a bully, elwood.  And you won't scare me off with your banning threats and name-calling, just as you did with Alex Gallichon (a welcome member of this community) last December.  

(And, Jack, thank you.)

[ Parent ]
An election is not a contest between combattants and (0.00 / 0)
acolytes.  Voters are not camp-followers.  They're employers looking to hire good servants.  Squabbling servants tend not to do good work.
[ Parent ]
That TR was for claiming that (4.00 / 2)
14 over 60 days supports your lie of "two diaries. That's a slow day."

14 versus 120.

[ Parent ]
Yes (2.67 / 3)
Also, when I called John E. Sununu a "douche bag," I did not actually believe that he was a popular women's sanitary product.  And when I referred to George W. Bush as "devil," it wasn't because I though he had horns and a pointy tail.  But I think my point was pretty obvious in those cases, as it was here.

Your TR was for personal name-calling.  Again.

[ Parent ]
Whoa - I am productive! (4.00 / 1)
Especially when fact checking Jeanne Shaheen's 2002 tax position is counted as "anti-Swett."

birch paper; on Twitter @deanbarker
[ Parent ]
You're trolling. Why are we letting you? (4.00 / 4)
Trolling through your constant hijacking of the subject from what is addressed in a post to whatever is your anti-Kuster point of the month, through your relentless aspersions on Kuster supporters -- speaking as if everyone else acts with the greatest possible cynicism and dishonesty -- and through your martyr-to-the-site act. You should have been gone a dozen times by the very generous standards usually applied in moderation here.

So why have you thus far been allowed to go pretty much unchecked? Precisely because we do disagree on candidates and are bending over backwards to be fair. And we do that knowing that this may be an issue in future site moderation if we ban someone for the same behaviors and they reasonably enough ask why you got away with it. That's a risk we'll take I guess, but it's also demonstrative of exactly how much you are NOT the victim you like to play here.

No amount of martyr posturing will disguise the fact that you have intentionally taken up residence under a bridge.  

[ Parent ]
There was no trolling (0.00 / 1)
There was no "trolling" -- I was responding to Elwood's charge about the negative tone of this primary discussion (which, granted, was not germaine to the diary topic].  You just didn't like my answer.  

Which is your right.  And you can ban me any time you want. But I have done nothing to merit it -- neither here nor elsewhere -- and will not let threats keep me from speaking my mind.

Of course, if I every published a distortion as staggeringly misleading as this, I would (and should) be banned in a heartbeat.

[ Parent ]
Sorry if I was unclear. You've BEEN trolling (0.00 / 0)
for weeks if not months. I wasn't speaking just to this exchange but to your pattern. I think JimC may have said it better, but it amounts to the same thing.

And what I think you don't get is that this is not a "threat." It's a warning. And even more than it's a warning to you -- because you've made clear how little you are listening to what the admins of this blog say -- it's an explanation to the rest of the community about why we've been tolerating your behavior.

As for my alleged distortion, I worked from the available texts. I'm sorry if you'd prefer I looked into Putin's Swett's eyes and saw her soul inner thoughts about marriage equality, but I prefer to go with what the public evidence says.

[ Parent ]
More than unclear, Laura (0.00 / 1)
If I were Elwood, I would recommend your banning for "lying".  But I'm pretty sure you'll skate by. :)
[ Parent ]
Hmm. Now either you're (0.00 / 0)
being disingenuous or you're not doing Dartmouth proud in the reading comprehension department. Because while I wasn't explicit about a time period -- a lack of specificity for which I do apologize -- I would think that words and phrases like "constant," "relentless," and "a dozen times" would convey the sense of passing time.
[ Parent ]
"You're trolling" (0.00 / 0)
You're = You are

Are is a present tense verb.  Nothing wrong with my reading comprehension.  You were very clear.  Just wrong.

[ Parent ]
Dum Dumz Keap owt (4.00 / 1)
Intra-Dartmouth Rivalry in progress.

Should I root for Gryffindor or Hufflepuff.


"Ill writers are usually the sharpest censors." - John Dryden

[ Parent ]
Isn't that. . . (4.00 / 1)
Craig Benson's golf course?
[ Parent ]
Binnie's n/t (0.00 / 0)




"When you get to the end of your rope, tie a knot and hang on."  Franklin D. Roosevelt    
[ Parent ]
Binnie & benson BOTH have golf courses (0.00 / 0)
Bill Binnie owns the Wentworth By the Sea Country Club (though not the hotel itself.)  

Craig Benson was the founder of the Golf Club of New England and (in spite of years of financial and legal complications) is still its "Honorary Chairman." The GCNE is a somewhat more exclusive club than the Wentworth: it was designed by Arnold Palmer & in 2012 it will host the US Junior Amateur Championship.

[ Parent ]
I need to ask you something (0.00 / 0)
Did you think I didn't know about Bensons golf course?  



"When you get to the end of your rope, tie a knot and hang on."  Franklin D. Roosevelt    
[ Parent ]
of course not... (4.00 / 2)
I knew you knew all about it... but you are just one of many people who read this blog.
[ Parent ]
you published one far worse (0.00 / 0)
to whit:
No   (0.00 / 0)
Katrina Swett has never been a registered lobbyist.  This is a matter of public record.
Case closed.  Drop it.
by: Dartmouth Dem @ Thu May 20, 2010 at 18:58:23 PM EDT

and DIDN'T get banned. You might disagree with Laura's analysis (and that's exactly what that headline is - of three different sources, including the Swett campaign and the Nashua Telegraph), but your outright WRONG assertion of a demonstrable fact is at least as bad.  

[ Parent ]
You must want to be banned (0.00 / 0)
Dave,
It simply is not wise to fuck with Laura Clawson.

You may feel like you are honor bound in some way to stick to your guns, but seppeku is only a glorious way to quit.

stfu, bro.

"Ill writers are usually the sharpest censors." - John Dryden

[ Parent ]
No (0.00 / 0)
But I'm not going to get scared off, either. And I won't take bullshit lying down (just as you won't).

Nevertheless, I appreciate your guidance, my friend.  You are an excellent human being.

[ Parent ]
Another TR for another lie. (2.00 / 2)
My comment about negative campaigning was specifically triggered by this diary - by Burling's negative letter against Kuster and Swope's choice to reprint it.

It was entirely germane.

[ Parent ]
Your definition of "lie" becomes broader and broader (1.33 / 3)
Really, it's a synonym for "disagrees with me."  You're not fooling anyone, elwood.

Whether it is germane is a matter of opinion. . . . Of course, when I protest attacks against Katrina Swett, I am "trolling", to use Laura's word.  

[ Parent ]
Both of you (4.00 / 1)
put a sock in it
[ Parent ]
' K (0.00 / 0)
I'm gone 'til after the primary, on those terms.
[ Parent ]
Elwood, you call people liars if they disagree with you (4.00 / 1)
You've done it to me before in non CD-02 postings.

[ Parent ]
Not true (4.00 / 1)
I have disagreed with Elwood dozens of times, and he's called me a couple of things, but never a liar.

[ Parent ]
Re-read. (4.00 / 1)
I call Dartmouth Dem's post lying, because it does. It makes straightforward, quantifiable claims that are checkable and proven wrong.

This attempt to call that simple disagreement is transparent hogwash.

[ Parent ]
Elwood's "lying" (1.33 / 3)
A direct quote:

"John Lynch is pretending the Democratic Party doesn't exist." - Elwood on Gov. Lynch's endorsement of Bob Odell (10/24/08)

This is demonstrably false.  I can provide considerable evidence that Gov. Lynch knew that the New Hampshire Democratic Party existed in 2008 -- including considerable financial contributions to the NHDP and support of party candidates at all levels.  I'm sure that Chairman Buckley can back me up on this.

[Note -- Let me be clear that this is tongue-in-cheek.  I'm simply applying Elwood's standard of "lying" to his own past statements.  Since, as Putney has pointed out, he normally uses that epithet only on people who disagree with him.]    

[ Parent ]
To my knowledge (0.00 / 0)
The "health care reform" effort took place in Washington. Was there a hotbed of HCR effort in Concord that I missed?

Oh wait, maybe there was some state bill being referred to. But how would Congress gut that? I'm confused ...


without a President to sign it etc (0.00 / 0)
Jim...Annie was at the top of the list by many estimations of how much she threw herself into Obama's campaign from a very early point...she was in the transition office in DC before the electricians...I am just saying she held back nothing in the chn age department...its same she gets slimed by the same old same old.
Michelle Obama invited Annie to the White House for her Mother's Day tea, because they became friends on the campaign trail. She knew of Annie's book on Azlheimer's, The Last Dance based on her illustrious mother's decline.
In contrats, The President had no idea who Dick Swett was when he bum's rushed the Nashua Town Hall.
It would certainly not hurt NH in any way to keep the 2nd CD seat of Paul Hodes blue, with a friend of the First family. jes sayin...

note to close readers: this might be sarcastic so think twice before reading to candidates for use in their attacks on each other
[ Parent ]
Are You Tiring of The Travel ? (0.00 / 0)
Where does a National Committeeman get off weighing in on a Party Primary ? He should pledge to support Ann Kuster now, when she wins, or step down.  

note to close readers: this might be sarcastic so think twice before reading to candidates for use in their attacks on each other
Anita and Gaeten endorsed primary candidates (0.00 / 0)

[ Parent ]
who did they endorse? n/t (0.00 / 0)


note to close readers: this might be sarcastic so think twice before reading to candidates for use in their attacks on each other
[ Parent ]
I know they endorsed presidential candidates (0.00 / 0)
I think they endorsed Shaheen over Fernald, but I'm not 100% certain on that.
[ Parent ]
big mistake in a Congressional match up (0.00 / 0)
they should not take sides, a la Ms. Kathy Sullivan, until their party picks a candidate. Then they are expected to support the nominee unequivocally. Unless its Lieberman. :-)

note to close readers: this might be sarcastic so think twice before reading to candidates for use in their attacks on each other
[ Parent ]
The Super Delegate Carpool (4.00 / 1)
How awkward.


"Ill writers are usually the sharpest censors." - John Dryden
[ Parent ]
t took me a minute...n/t (0.00 / 0)


note to close readers: this might be sarcastic so think twice before reading to candidates for use in their attacks on each other
[ Parent ]
Party rules (4.00 / 6)
The state party bylaws state that the only officer who cannot endorse in a primary is the state chairman. In the presidential primary, both Anita and Gaeten endorsed now SoS Clinton. Also I believe that if you go back in time, party officers endorsed in contested non-presidential primaries. By way of disclosure, I have endorsed Governor Lynch in this primary, despite the candidacy of my cousin Frank. I would not be surprised if all the other officers have endorsed the Governor as well, excluding the Chairman, who is bound by the rule mentioned above. I could endorse in this race, but have chosen not to do so, which, in light of the craziness being exhibited by the candidates' supporters here at BH, was a wise course. I must ask the blogger formerly known as Sleepy Guy - were we this crazed over Clinton/Obama? I guess so, maybe worse!  

I will now retreat, and leave you all to continue your Groundhog Day like debates which thankfully will be over in three weeks.

 



"When you get to the end of your rope, tie a knot and hang on."  Franklin D. Roosevelt    

[ Parent ]
18 days n/t (4.00 / 1)


note to close readers: this might be sarcastic so think twice before reading to candidates for use in their attacks on each other
[ Parent ]
We had our go (4.00 / 2)
Then we shook hands and got to work.

I figure, as bloggers, we hack and slash because we truly believe in the cause and our candidate. I hope it is in that order.

We have a choice, for reasons that seem very clear to me, my choice is Annie. How could I not put every once of energy into helping her earn the nomination? DD does his part.

Blogging requires a certain willingness to "go there." It shakes folks up and gets them to recalibrate. There are very distinct styles in approaching the art on this forum.

When it's all said and done, I'm in it to win it. Even if somebody really pisses me off, I'll find a way to lean in and get the nominee elected.

Imo, we are bound to this. Our passion, if properly prioritized, mandates it.

"Ill writers are usually the sharpest censors." - John Dryden

[ Parent ]
with complete respect (4.00 / 1)
I almost hesitate to mention on this thread, but I think a pretty good case could be made for national committeepeople not endorsing in primaries. I think a reasonable exception would be the presidential - since they are temporary residents of the state - and the in-state examples Kathy cites seem pretty innocuous, but I still think endorsing candidates in non-prez primaries is might merit reconsidering.  
[ Parent ]
Maybe (4.00 / 1)
There are arguments good and bad on both sides. I agree that it may be time to take it up again at the state committee, it is one of those topices worthy of review, not because of this primary, but because it is a good one to discuss from time to time.

2012 may be a bear - we could have a real brawl in the gubernatorial primary, unless Governor Lynch decides to run for term 5, which I would be in favor of!  



"When you get to the end of your rope, tie a knot and hang on."  Franklin D. Roosevelt    

[ Parent ]
can't wait (0.00 / 0)
I'm loaded for bear!!!

note to close readers: this might be sarcastic so think twice before reading to candidates for use in their attacks on each other
[ Parent ]
photo from election night '08 (4.00 / 4)
and DD was there too...

Photobucket

note to close readers: this might be sarcastic so think twice before reading to candidates for use in their attacks on each other

[ Parent ]
What a great election (4.00 / 5)
I finally got to meet Sleeping Giant. Also, I have fond memories of DD escorting me through a hostile crowd at the Shahheen/Sununu debate at WMUR. He came up from DC to volunteer for the coordinated.

Long story short, DD, along with Putney, Jack, JonnyBBad and the rest of you here - you are all the good guys, and after the primary, I know everyone will work to win the 2nd CC seat no matter who our nominee is!!        



"When you get to the end of your rope, tie a knot and hang on."  Franklin D. Roosevelt    

[ Parent ]
Putney and I (2.67 / 3)
met while hitting each other over the head in a sign war outside a Gore-Bradley Debate in Nashua in late 1999. It was those bright lights from WMUR...we wanted to 'out crazy each other'...thank god we've grown and matured!

note to close readers: this might be sarcastic so think twice before reading to candidates for use in their attacks on each other
[ Parent ]
A beautiful friendship (4.00 / 1)
And Johnny knows my cousin - who I've never met!
[ Parent ]
are you sayin' carzy is a guy thing ? n/t (0.00 / 0)


note to close readers: this might be sarcastic so think twice before reading to candidates for use in their attacks on each other
[ Parent ]
I love that picture (4.00 / 6)
But, I have to say, it is not relevant to the matter at hand.

Yes, there was a spirited primary campaign, and yes, there were some nasty exchanges. But there was and is a separate thing called Blue Hampshire, and in the context of BH, those two participants always deferred to the authority of the editors of the site (who nearly all, by the way, endorsed Edwards in the primary, against the wishes of those two -- no accusations were made about that).

- I do not recall either of them ignoring repeated warnings.

- Neither ever threatened to retaliate if someone wrote something they disapproved of.

- Neither ever questioned the integrity of the people who run the place. In fact, they regularly expressed gratitude for its existence.

And it's this last point that galls me the most. I've spent a lot of time here (that's no one's fault but mine), but when DD decided he was willing to damage the community for the sake of his candidate, to me that was unforgivable.

OK, unforgivable is too strong. To err is human and all that. But there was another choice to make.

Does it amount to banning? I don't know. I'm glad it's not my call.


[ Parent ]
5-10 years with time off for good behavior n/t (4.00 / 1)


note to close readers: this might be sarcastic so think twice before reading to candidates for use in their attacks on each other
[ Parent ]
The Internet is a big place (4.00 / 2)
- Neither ever questioned the integrity of the people who run the place. In fact, they regularly expressed gratitude for its existence.

We truly have something special here.

"Ill writers are usually the sharpest censors." - John Dryden

[ Parent ]
Jack and the Emperor rock (0.00 / 0)
I love those guys. . . .
[ Parent ]
so funny (0.00 / 0)
remember when Kathy was afraid to go out on her porch cuz she thought Jack was an internet stalker? he who used bad language...he was too much...when Kathy breathed Hillary he exhaled Obama...he was so committed to the guy that inspired him one summer night in Boston in 2004,he saw anyone powerful and not on his team as evil!!!!

note to close readers: this might be sarcastic so think twice before reading to candidates for use in their attacks on each other
[ Parent ]
Oh, that was my game face, Jon (4.00 / 1)
Kinda like Papelbon.

That is not to say I am not skeptical of the establishment. Hell, I got a beef with OFA.



"Ill writers are usually the sharpest censors." - John Dryden

[ Parent ]
understood, you support the conservative candidate ! n/t (0.00 / 0)


note to close readers: this might be sarcastic so think twice before reading to candidates for use in their attacks on each other
NH Carpenters Local 118 Endorse Kuster (4.00 / 1)
From a campaign press release:
NH Carpenters Endorse Kuster

CONCORD, NH -  New Hampshire Carpenters Local 118 today announced their endorsement of Ann McLane Kuster in her primary and general elections in New Hampshire's Second Congressional District. More than 3,000 New Hampshire voters are part of the Carpenter's council.

"Our members need someone who will fight every day for New Hampshire's working families, and who will put what's best for people ahead of politics as usual," wrote Carpenters President John Jackson and New England Carpenters Labor Management Program President Joseph Donahue.

"Annie Kuster has made it her top prority to focus on creating jobs, and right now, that's what we need the most," continued Jackson and Donahue.  "We know that she will be the type of leader who puts her constituents first and who works to ensure everyone has the opportunity to provide for their family"

-snip



"Ill writers are usually the sharpest censors." - John Dryden
Nice endorsement n/t (4.00 / 1)

[ Parent ]
she really nailed it ! n/t (0.00 / 0)


note to close readers: this might be sarcastic so think twice before reading to candidates for use in their attacks on each other
[ Parent ]
Just Rec'd This Diary (0.00 / 0)
1) It ultimately comes out looking better for Kuster
2) Gotta give the Swett diaries some spotlight.  

"Ill writers are usually the sharpest censors." - John Dryden
I am more than happy (0.00 / 0)
To demonstrate, that out there on the intertubes, is a place where third party, independent sources are available to refute those assertions made through the "lens" of the Swett campaign.

Note: No source is quoted, that cannot by linked to. It may be easier for the casual lurker to breeze through BH, taking what they choose from it. But, they may also choose to follow the links provided, testing the veracity of the content.

And your thoughts about Swett's client, CGS?

"Ill writers are usually the sharpest censors." - John Dryden

Not since Barack Obama (4.00 / 1)
... I don't think, has a single person caused so many comments on one thread without setting foot (so to speak) on the site. Mr. Burling must be pleased.


Do "Bush tax cuts" = "tax cuts for the wealthy"? (4.00 / 4)
And is it fair to say that Katrina Swett supported the latter? An interesting question from all the nonsense above.

The Bush tax cuts were for all income groups.

That said, they were tilted heavily towards the wealthy.

This is easily found from a CPPB report, citing data from the Brookings Institution and the Congressional Budget Office

Here is the percent rise in after tax income for various economic groups:

Lowest 20%: 0.4%
Middle 20%: 2.3%
Top 20%: 4.6%
Top 1%: 6.8%
Incomes Over $1 Million:  7.6%

And the drop in the federal tax rate for those groups?

Lowest 20%: -1.9%
Middle 20%: -2.0%
Top 20%: -3.4%
Top 1%: -4.8%

I suppose you could say, well, back in '02, it was harder to tease out the consequences of Bush's tax cuts.

Norman Jackman was Katrina Swett's primary opponent in 2002.  He was effectively ignored.  He advocated cancelling the Bush tax cuts for the sake of the deficit, but adds here, simply:

"Freeze future tax cuts for the wealthy."

Finally, and relatedly, Katrina Swett, unlike Jeanne Shaheen, as her campaign claimed this year, but like Charlie Bass, John Stephen, and John E. Sununu, advocated on multiple occasions for the "elimination" of the estate tax, or as she called it, the "death tax."

Modifying the estate tax, as was Jeanne Shaheen's position, would not have benefited the wealthy necessarily.

I don't have a handy study available (there may well be one; I haven't looked), but I would be hard pressed to know how a complete repeal of the estate tax would not be a significant tax cut for the wealthy. We do know a repeal would dramatically increase the federal deficit.

Of course, I am one of the six editors and guest writers on BH who have endorsed Annie Kuster.  So I encourage anyone interested not to believe me, but instead follow the links and come up with your own conclusions on whether the Bush tax cuts, or the "death tax" repeal, are "tax cuts for the wealthy."

birch paper; on Twitter @deanbarker

Study: Bush Tax Cuts Cost More Than Twice As Much As Dems' Health-Care Bill (4.00 / 1)

http://crooksandliars.com/susi...

"Ill writers are usually the sharpest censors." - John Dryden

[ Parent ]
with apologies to the artists (4.00 / 2)
Welcome back my friends to the thread that never ends
We're so glad you could attend
Come inside! Come inside!
There behind a glass is a real donkey's ass
be careful as you pass.
Move along! Move along!

Come inside, the show's about to start
guaranteed to blow your head apart
Rest assured you'll get your money's worth
The greatest show in Heaven, Hell or Earth.
You've got to see the show, it's a dynamo.
You've got to see the show, it's rock and roll ....

Soon the dueling queens in a party vote machine
Will perform on guillotine
What a scene! What a scene!
Next upon the stand will you please extend a hand
to New Hampshire's Ragtime Band
Roll up! Roll up! Roll up!
See the show!

Peter Burling's comments about lobbying and the Kuster-Swett race | 136 comments

Connect with BH
     
Blue Hampshire Blog on Facebook
Powered by: SoapBlox