More of AG Ayotte Representing Our Values

Bring out the Libs (0.00 / 0)

Legalize medical marijuana.

Paul co-sponsored the States' Rights to Medical Marijuana Act:

Title: To provide for the medical use of marijuana in accordance with the laws of the various States.

Summary: Transfers marijuana from schedule I of the Controlled Substances Act to schedule II of such Act. Declares that, in a State in which marijuana may be prescribed or recommended by a physician for medical use under applicable State law, no provision of the Controlled Substances Act shall prohibit or otherwise restrict:

-the prescription or recommendation of marijuana by a physician for medical use;

-an individual from obtaining and using marijuana from a physician's prescription or recommendation of marijuana for medical use; or

-a pharmacy from obtaining and holding marijuana for the prescription or recommendation of marijuana by a physician for medical use under applicable State law.

-Prohibits any provision of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act from prohibiting or restricting a State entity from producing or distributing marijuana for the purpose of its distribution for prescription or recommendation by a physician in a State in which marijuana may be prescribed by a physician for medical use.

Source: House Resolution Sponsorship 01-HR2592 on Jul 23, 2001

Whack-a-mole, anyone?

---

by: Jack Mitchell @ Tue Mar 10, 2009 at 14:16:05 PM CDT

We should seriously consider treating it like alcohol and tobacco anyway. (4.00 / 1)

If only because our government's failed war on marijuana and its users is far too expensive.

The Office of National Drug Control Policy is spending millions this year to advertise against its use because, among other things, it lowers one's ability to win video games.  Meanwhile, the government's insistence that marijuana (far more widely used than "hard drugs") is tantamount to more dangerous substances can only lead the less informed to think one can't be so bad if it's no worse than the other.

This prohibition has failed.  It's too widespread to be putting our fellow citizens in jail for it.  Legalization would put criminal enterprise out of business and get the economy moving too.

The part that really gets me is that we're not even having an honest debate about this.  We do love to proclaim our motto, "Live Free or Die", after all.

And I say this as someone who can't stand even the smell of the thing.

---

by: This Was The Moment @ Tue Mar 10, 2009 at 20:08:21 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

I have vertigo (0.00 / 0)

Can I spark up for that?

I'm not sure the consensus is there on this one, measures. It might be, but I have no data. I'll be curious to see what the legislature does. Ayotte's position, while not exactly helpful, is not exactly obstructionist either.

---

by: JimC @ Tue Mar 10, 2009 at 14:42:30 PM CDT

That's part of the problem - (4.00 / 2)

Medical marijuana can turn into a debate into "Who should be allowed, because of their terrible medical need, to get it?"

When the data says, "It's less harmful than tobacco or alcohol, so the prohibition should be ended anyhow."

---

by: elwood @ Tue Mar 10, 2009 at 18:12:25 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

I agree (4.00 / 1)

I was being a bit cheeky, as if I opposed medical marijuana on slippery slope grounds.

As I think I've said before, I'm squeamish about legalization, but I also don't want the users I know to do time, so I have to support legalization.

---

by: JimC @ Tue Mar 10, 2009 at 18:53:20 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

bravo to Rep. Evelyn Merrick (4.00 / 3)

for having the courage to speak up about her own experience. If my dad had wanted marijuana while he was dying of cancer, I would have gladly gotten it for him.

Ironic, isn't it - the party of less gummint has gotten us into 2 wars we can't ever win. The war on terra, and the war on drugs.  

sanctimonious purist/professional lefty

---

by: susanthe @ Tue Mar 10, 2009 at 15:16:45 PM CDT

this isn't the most recent polling, (0.00 / 0)

http://www.gallup.com/poll/101...

but it was the one I could find quickest. I have seen subsequent polling that comports with this (Gallup did one in 2005 that had the total at 78%), but this is a pretty good snapshot I think.

It is also worthing noting that the Obama administration has said they will no longer raid medical pot dispensaries and have hinted at broader toleration. Ms. Ayotte's office choose to ignore that and lean - again - on a federalism argument.  

---

by: measurestaken @ Tue Mar 10, 2009 at 16:32:08 PM CDT

Ayotte: Wrong Again (0.00 / 0)

I attended that hearing and even though Ayotte was in the hall, she dared not personally appear and tell the ridiculous lies her spokesperson told. By watching the spokesperson (name?) it was plain to see even she knew the AG was simply pandering to the police state mentality. She actually had the nerve to say marijuana is addictive. I couldn't make this up.

At least Obama is letting science be science. The indisputable fact is marijuana has legitimate very helpful medical uses. It makes a difference in healing our citizens. Ayotte has the ostrich approach: pretend away reality, encourage police to bust people who are seriously ill. Sickening.

This governor re-appointed Ayotte! We need a Democratic candidate for governor.  

No'm Sayn?

---

by: BurtCohen @ Tue Mar 10, 2009 at 18:30:18 PM CDT

Too early... (0.00 / 0)

for me to continue stating my disappointment in nominating Ayotte again? She is a conservative republican. I am a big Lynch fan, but come on.  

res severa verum gaudia

---

by: lawduck @ Tue Mar 10, 2009 at 20:09:34 PM CDT

Does it matter (0.00 / 0)

Does it matter if the AG does not support Medical Marijuana?

She does not have veto power, or a vote in the State Senate or State House.

---

by: sdoyle @ Tue Mar 10, 2009 at 20:29:53 PM CDT

Well... (0.00 / 0)

while Ayotte does not have veto power, she is still the chief attorney for our state. I assume that Lynch will pay attention to what she says.  

res severa verum gaudia

---

by: lawduck @ Tue Mar 10, 2009 at 20:52:06 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

So she was wasting taxpayer money (0.00 / 0)

by appearing?

Is that your position?

---

by: elwood @ Tue Mar 10, 2009 at 20:55:20 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

No (0.00 / 0)

No that is not my position she was wasting taxpayer money by attending a press conference.

My position is that the Attorney General of the State of New Hampshire does not have a vote in the State House, a vote in the State Senate, and does not have veto power, so why does it matter that she does not support the issue, because she can't vote on it, or veto it.

---

by: sdoyle @ Tue Mar 10, 2009 at 21:02:28 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

It is her job (4.00 / 2)

to be able to speak intelligently in public on issues under her jurisdiction. She forfeited that opportunity today, and sent some ill-informed lackey in her place.

That is a waste of taxpayer's money.  

sanctimonious purist/professional lefty

---

by: susanthe @ Tue Mar 10, 2009 at 21:34:59 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Once again you are ignoring the bully pulpit (4.00 / 1)

Ayotte is using it; Lynch only selectively uses it

---

by: Putney Swope @ Tue Mar 10, 2009 at 22:17:22 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

The chief state prosecutor (4.00 / 6)

supports throwing sick people in jail. You don't think there are implications for the public in that?

---

by: Alex Gallichon @ Tue Mar 10, 2009 at 22:55:39 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

No Vote nor veto? (4.00 / 1)

Has sdoyle ever watched the legislative process? The AG of course has no vote. But that person has significant influence, much more than a regular citizen, sorry to say. That person is a mouthpiece for the governor. By using Ayotte, who then used another underling, Lynch loudly proclaimed his position to the legislators. It is sickening. The young man in a wheelchair who spoke told that he has been mugged in the past by people who took advantage of his powerlessness. These are the people the AG (and the governor?) would sen to jail for earnestly seeking effective treatment and healing.  

No'm Sayn?

---

by: BurtCohen @ Wed Mar 11, 2009 at 07:30:19 AM CDT

It doesn't matter (0.00 / 0)

"Has sdoyle ever watched the legislative process? The AG of course has no vote."

Yes I have seen the legislative process, which is why I brought up the point that the AG is in a separate branch of state government, so why should we care what she thinks about the issue.

If state legislatures are basing their votes on what the AG thinks of something then they should not be in the legislature because they are not representing the people of their district.

---

by: sdoyle @ Wed Mar 11, 2009 at 08:16:26 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

OK You tell them! (0.00 / 0)

Clearly you have missed a significant part of the legislative process: "why should we care what she thinks about the issue."
I suppose in an ideal world, testimony from the executive branch would mean no more than any other citizen. That is most certainly not the case in Concord!
"If state legislatures are basing their votes on what the AG thinks of something then they should not be in the legislature because they are not representing the people of their district"
Let me know how your conversation with those legislators goes.  

No'm Sayn?

---

by: BurtCohen @ Wed Mar 11, 2009 at 15:47:22 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Burt Cohen is a former NH State Senator... (0.00 / 0)

...who knows of what he speaks. I respectfully don't think you understand the process.

---

by: Putney Swope @ Wed Mar 11, 2009 at 20:52:06 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

I know who Burt Cohen is (4.00 / 1)

I think I am the best person to determine what I know and what I do know and do not know.

---

by: sdoyle @ Wed Mar 11, 2009 at 22:07:12 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

But from your postings you don't know how important Ayotte is (0.00 / 0)

---

by: Putney Swope @ Wed Mar 11, 2009 at 22:36:28 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

From my postings (4.00 / 1)

you can see I know that a State Agency does not have power in this situation. And correct me if I am wrong here, but the AG CANNOT VOTE IN THE STATE LEGISLATURE.

The AG can climb atop the State House and rant and rave how much she does not like this bill, but that is all she can do. She cannot make legislatures vote one way or another, she cannot make the Governor either sign something into law or veto it.

So again I say, why does it matter what she thinks, legislatures are going to vote the way they are going to vote, I am sure most, if not all have already made up their minds on how they are going to vote, when they heard about this bill way back, before the AG's testimony, when the bill was written and submitted back in January.

---

by: sdoyle @ Thu Mar 12, 2009 at 08:42:59 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

you're ignoring an important point (0.00 / 0)

As the appointee of the governor, she is speaking for him.

This means that through the channel of minions, Governor Lynch is saying that my husband (who right now is having a hard time eating because he just had a round of radiation to his neck, and everything tastes awful) and every other cancer patient in our state can go pound sand - and go to jail, should they be caught with pot.

I understand that you're doing a peppy little defend the governor dance here, but this is indefensible.  

sanctimonious purist/professional lefty

---

by: susanthe @ Thu Mar 12, 2009 at 09:22:47 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Ignoring a point? (0.00 / 0)

I do not think I am ignoring an important point.

I am pretty sure that the AG has no official capacity when dealing with the state legislature, but I haven't read the state constituition in awhile.

If you think I am doing a little pep dance that is fine. You are entitled to your opinion, and you know what mine is on the subject.

---

by: sdoyle @ Thu Mar 12, 2009 at 09:47:48 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

yes, ignoring (0.00 / 0)

Kelly Ayotte is speaking for the GOVERNOR.

This means, the GOVERNOR would prefer to jail the terminally ill than consider legislation for  medical marijuana.  

sanctimonious purist/professional lefty

---

by: susanthe @ Thu Mar 12, 2009 at 10:03:12 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

I missed the part (0.00 / 0)

where the lawyer who spoke for the AG said that Ayotte is speaking for Governor Lynch.

The AG's office offered its opinion on the bill, that is all, the article did not say that the Asst. Attorney General spoke on behalf of the Governor, I think they would have reported something like that.

I don't know about you, but when I am looking for the Governor's position on something I usually look for him to say it or his Press Secretary. From now on I guess I will listen to an Assistant Attorney General for press releases from the office of the Governor.

---

by: sdoyle @ Thu Mar 12, 2009 at 12:08:27 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Susan that is untrue (4.00 / 2)

The AG does not speak for the governor. Perhaps under some governors and some AGs that could possibly be true (though I cannot think of an instance).

You can express your displeasure with the AG Ayotte without making false charges, it hurts your argument.

The Attorney General does not serve at the pleasure of the governor like his legal counsel. The AG is nominated by a governor and confirmed by a majority of the executive council for a four year term.

If President Obama named Governor Lynch to be Ambassador to Canada in May and Senator President Larsen became acting governor, was successful in the special election she would have to be reelected twice more before she would have the opportunity to nominate an AG.

It is just not accurate to claim that Ayotte speaks for Lynch.


2012 starts today.

---

by: Ray Buckley @ Thu Mar 12, 2009 at 12:38:23 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

okay (0.00 / 0)

Let's unpack this little suitcase.

Kelly Ayotte was a Benson appointee. She is a rising star in the GOP.  Governor Lynch appreciates her work as state AG so much that he recently re-appointed her to serve another term.

This is in spite of her anti-choice stance, and her embarrassing conduct regarding civil unions.

Clearly Governor Lynch must find her very competent and simpatico, for him to appoint her to another term, especially since she's a Republican.

How, then, can you suggest that she is speaking contrary to the Governor's beliefs? Why would he re-appoint Kelly Ayotte if her beliefs are so different from his own?

Of course Lynch could come out and speak for himself  - but I know better than to think he'll take a public stand on anything controversial. That medical marijuana is controversial at all is unbelievable to me. We treat sick and dying pets  with more compassion than we do sick and dying humans.  

sanctimonious purist/professional lefty

---

by: susanthe @ Thu Mar 12, 2009 at 13:48:46 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Apples and Oranges (0.00 / 0)

There is a big difference between agreeing with someone and speaking on behalf of someone.

Governor Lynch does not need to go through the public exercize of having the AG to "speak for him". He has many more effective ways to send a message he wants sent.

Support your position and disagree with the AG's position, that is where you will win this discussion, not by a side argument about Lynch that isn't true.


2012 starts today.

---

by: Ray Buckley @ Thu Mar 12, 2009 at 14:12:45 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Sorry Ray (0.00 / 0)

your assertions do nothing to address anything in my last post. Shaking your fist and shouting that Kelly Ayotte doesn't speak for Lynch is not an argument. It's just yelling.

Lynch appointed Ayotte for another term. Clearly he finds her competent and sympatico, why else would he re-appoint her?

That seems pretty clear to me. I'm sorry it's so upsetting to you.  

sanctimonious purist/professional lefty

---

by: susanthe @ Thu Mar 12, 2009 at 14:46:48 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Good grief. (4.00 / 1)

I'm not angry or shaking my fist or upset. I'm trying to help you out, sorry you can't see that. I voted for this legislation many times over the years and you don't help your case when you go off on wild tangents that aren't true.

Let's be civil.

2012 starts today.

---

by: Ray Buckley @ Thu Mar 12, 2009 at 15:18:51 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

I'm not being rude or lacking civility (0.00 / 0)

We all know that Ms Ayotte has put her foot in it a time or two, yet Lynch reappointed her for another term. Clearly he finds her a valuable, simpatico AG - someone who shares his POV, otherwise he would have appointed someone else.

That's a pretty simple concept - yet you don't seem able to address it.  

sanctimonious purist/professional lefty

---

by: susanthe @ Thu Mar 12, 2009 at 16:02:09 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

You aren't being consistent Susan (4.00 / 2)

If you are asking me if I believe that Governor Lynch and AG Ayotte have commonality, then yes, it would appear that they ehjoy working with each other and have some area of agreement. Do I think they are 100% idealogically matched? Of course not, Governor Lynch signed the repeal of parental notification AND the civil unions law. The argument that they are in lockstep with each other is simply untrue.

But that is not what we are discussing Susan...

What caused me to join this discussion was your insistance that Ayotte "speaks for" Lynch and your statement that she does so in a staff-like role. Which you have yet to provide any basis for your declaration other than your belief that it is true.

I strongly encourage you lend your significant talents in medical marijuana debate, along with expressing your feelings toward the AG for her opposition. You have solid arguments for your position but it doesn't help your position to go off on this Lynch riff.

2012 starts today.

---

by: Ray Buckley @ Thu Mar 12, 2009 at 17:28:08 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

gee thanks Ray (0.00 / 1)

what are the penalties if I disobey?

The Lynch Stormtrooper Team sure is out in full force today.  

sanctimonious purist/professional lefty

---

by: susanthe @ Thu Mar 12, 2009 at 17:40:18 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Nice (2.00 / 2)

What a pleasant response to a civil email.  Nice way to compare our Democratic leadership to the Gestapo.  Classy.  Perhaps you could question Ray's psychological wellbeing for good measure, just like you did four times to me in the Howard Dean diary?

For someone who has repeatedly complained about being marginalized in the Democratic Party, you are certainly not shy about rudely dismissing the opinions of anyone who takes a position contrary to your own.

And don't bother responding:  As someone recently said to me (twice), "You're not worth it."

---

by: Dartmouth Dem @ Thu Mar 12, 2009 at 18:08:37 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Unknown unknowns (0.00 / 0)

As Donald Rumsfeld said"...there are known knowns; there are things we know we know. We also know there are known unknowns; that is to say we know there are some things we do not know. But there are also unknown unknowns -- the ones we don't know we don't know."

It's a round, round world - Stan Freberg

---

by: NHFlatlander @ Wed Mar 11, 2009 at 22:55:44 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

OK, Let's See the Governor (4.00 / 2)

Sometimes those rushing to our governor's defense seem to forget Democrats are not Lite Republicans.

Will he take a position contrary to his AG? Have Ayotte and Lynch disagreed on anything so far?

The AG has a lot of power with the legislature, that is a fact. The governor has no vote either, but he also has some sway. So let's see him come out for decency and compassion for citizens with serious illnesses. Don't threaten jail; let them heal!

The president is setting the stage with his new drug czar--at last, some common sense! Time for Lynch to step up. But don't hold your breath folks.  

No'm Sayn?

---

by: BurtCohen @ Thu Mar 12, 2009 at 14:51:41 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

I mean, (0.00 / 0)

the veto power is effectively a heavy vote.

---

by: Alex Gallichon @ Thu Mar 12, 2009 at 15:24:13 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Well (4.00 / 1)

since you apparently don't know the legislative process, you should know as I have mentioned several times above that the Governor does have a vote, it is called a veto.

The Governor and the AG have disagreed on issues in the past, and I am sure they will disagree on issues in the future.

I do not know what the Governor thinks of the issue.

And sometimes those rushing to criticize the Governor at every opportunity seem to forget that the Governor, is the Governor of the State of New Hampshire, and not the Governor of Democrats.

---

by: sdoyle @ Thu Mar 12, 2009 at 15:44:30 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

You are still ignoring Ayotte's role in the bully pulpit (4.00 / 1)

"A bully pulpit is a public office of sufficiently high rank that provides the holder with an opportunity to speak out and be listened to on any matter. The bully pulpit can bring issues to the forefront that were not initially in debate, due to the office's stature and publicity."

(I hate to quote Wikipedia, but it is the best explanation I can find)

Democrats simply do not need her in this role.

---

by: Putney Swope @ Thu Mar 12, 2009 at 16:54:18 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Ya know... (0.00 / 0)

I haven't read the Asst. AG's testimony from the hearing, but from what I have read in the Concord Monitor article, the only news article I can find on the subject, it mentions two lines of how the AG felt about current federal laws and about the bill.

I have not seen the AG on WMUR, writing editorials in the UL, or even posting on Granite Grok. So the argument that she is using her role in the bully pulpit format really holds no water.

---

by: sdoyle @ Thu Mar 12, 2009 at 21:37:24 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

I'm not talking about the Asst AG... (0.00 / 0)

You are...

She is using the bully pulpit in the legislature, if you haven't figured that out.

---

by: Putney Swope @ Thu Mar 12, 2009 at 22:07:32 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Uh no (0.00 / 0)

If the AG was using the 'bully pulpit' in the state legislature, she would have testified, and not an Asst. AG.

---

by: sdoyle @ Thu Mar 12, 2009 at 22:38:04 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Not necessarily (0.00 / 0)

I don't think you have ever mentioned on these pages what you actually think about the renomination of Ayotte; if she is good for the citizens of this state; and if she is good for the Democrats of this state.

This has nothing to do with Lynch - this has only to do with Ayotte. Let's see if you can separate the two.

---

by: Putney Swope @ Thu Mar 12, 2009 at 23:10:31 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Time out (4.00 / 1)

Putney, your comments have a lot to do with John Lynch - while I haven't kept track of exact nubmers, it seems that most of your posts at BH attack John Lynch in some way. So, it is hard to believe that your current flurry of activity on Ayotte doesn't have a lot to do with yoiur animus toward the governor, reflected now in your attitude toward his nomination of Ayotte.

And now, I will return to the sidelines of this debate!  



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

---

by: Kathy Sullivan 2 @ Fri Mar 13, 2009 at 07:53:30 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

I like the jumbled cabinet (4.00 / 2)

approach created by the NH Constitution. I think it suggests that a Governor should appoint the very best people, even if that does not always happen.

It would, perhaps, be a good subject for another diary: whether the Attorney General's office should remain appointed as it is, made more subordinate to and reflective of the will of the Governor, or directly elected by the people across the state.

I agree that the Attorney General does not speak for the Governor, however she does speak on behalf of the executive authority of the state. I think she's rightfully criticized for her position on this issue, and I think it's OK to express disappointment with Lynch's reappointment with Ayotte as a result of that decision, especially given her previous record.

---

by: Alex Gallichon @ Thu Mar 12, 2009 at 18:13:29 PM CDT

Very revealing threads (0.00 / 0)

We have a chair of the Democratic Party defending a shockingly out of touch, dedicated Republican AG, who willfully ignores facts to impose a right wing agenda. We have a head of the young Democrats who clearly has the best of intentions and demonstrates understandable youthful naivete. But come on, throughout this discussion the facts remain:
Our supposedly Democratic governor is loudly silent when his AG supports worse-than-draconian, mean-spirited laws which treat, as someone here suggested, seriously ill citizens worse than dogs.
I always thought being a Democrat meant more than kiss-up loyalty but meant something truly important and principled for the common good.  

No'm Sayn?

---

by: BurtCohen @ Fri Mar 13, 2009 at 07:59:23 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

One Thought (0.00 / 0)

Burt,

I agree with your 100% on the medical marijuana issue, and on your characterization of the AG.  And, while I disagree with you on Gov. Lynch's merits, he should not have re-appointed Ayotte do this job, and should take some (but not all) of the flack when she pulls crap like this.

Still, I think you are wrong to marginalize Sean by attributing his ideas to "youthful naivete."  Sean presents a cogent point of view, and he defends it with facts.  He is a valuable contributor on Blue Hampshire, and he should not be patronized.

---

by: Dartmouth Dem @ Fri Mar 13, 2009 at 08:22:42 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

I would respond (4.00 / 1)

but my "understandable youthful naivete" has prevented me from putting together a coherent position on the subject.

---

by: sdoyle @ Fri Mar 13, 2009 at 08:38:38 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Sorry but (0.00 / 0)

To again and again assert the AG has no power can only be described this way. It's not at all a criticism; your view really should prevail and be accurate. Sadly it is not. I appreciate the energy and hope, lord knows we need it!!

No'm Sayn?

---

by: BurtCohen @ Fri Mar 13, 2009 at 08:56:55 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Lying should be beneath you Burt (4.00 / 1)

No where will you find me comment on the Attorney General.

Let me repeat what I have said:

1. The governor and AG to do not agree on every issue.

2. The AG does not speak for the governor.

3. The AG does not serve at the pleasure of the governor.

4. I voted as a legislator for medical marijuana laws.

5. I believe that making stuff up does not help the pro-medical marijuana argument.

So, Burton Joseph Cohen, tell me where I am "defending" the AG...

Or apologize.

2012 starts today.

---

by: Ray Buckley @ Fri Mar 13, 2009 at 11:00:38 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Calm down Ray (0.00 / 0)

Making stuff up? Where? It sure looks like you are defending the governor, who appointed the AG, and who has not yet, to my knowledge, distanced himself from the AG on this issue. What IS the governor's position? Do you defend his silence and apparent acquiescence?  

No'm Sayn?

---

by: BurtCohen @ Fri Mar 13, 2009 at 11:29:41 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Stay Calm Raymond (0.00 / 0)

Making stuff up? Where? It sure looks like you are defending the governor, who appointed the AG, and who has not yet, to my knowledge, distanced himself from the AG on this issue. What IS the governor's position? Do you defend his silence and apparent acquiescence?  

No'm Sayn?

---

by: BurtCohen @ Fri Mar 13, 2009 at 11:31:03 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Adding insult to injury (4.00 / 2)

Instead of admitting that you lied when you falsely claimed that I was "defenfing" the AG - you veer off into yet another direction.

Once again, I will repeat: I am not defending or attacking anyone, I am simply stating that while expressing your displeasure with the AG's stance on the issue use facts and truths not lies and fantasies.

The only ones hysterical in this diary are the folks who would rather fling mud and wild charges than deal with facts and realities.

2012 starts today.

---

by: Ray Buckley @ Fri Mar 13, 2009 at 12:36:26 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

I think I have neither (0.00 / 0)

flung (flinged?) mud nor made wild charges. I would, however, be interested in hearing what you, as NH Democratic chair, think of Gov. Lynch's decision to reappoint Craig Benson's pick to be our attorney general when there are any number of Democrats who could do the job at least as well as she can.  

---

by: measurestaken @ Fri Mar 13, 2009 at 18:30:06 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Kathy Sullivan weeks ago (4.00 / 1)

Already explained that the State Chair, of any state and of any party, does not publicly comment on that. Enough already.

BTW, I was not referring to you.

2012 starts today.

---

by: Ray Buckley @ Fri Mar 13, 2009 at 18:45:42 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

All of this debate would be rendered irrelevant IF (0.00 / 0)

Lynch would simply accept the proposition that being appointed to a position like this DOESN'T MEAN that the appointee is assumed to be reappointed in perpetuity unless they make some massive  mistake.

I think it has been aptly demonstrated that there is a large number of people (including Democrats) who do the AGs job at least as well as Ms. Ayotte.

If Mr. Buckley disagrees, I urge him to say so.  

---

by: measurestaken @ Thu Mar 12, 2009 at 23:08:54 PM CDT

Dick Flynn n/t (0.00 / 0)

for transparency sake ~I represent Union print shops

---

by: JonnyBBad @ Fri Mar 13, 2009 at 06:20:24 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

John Stephen n/t (0.00 / 0)

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

---

by: Kathy Sullivan 2 @ Fri Mar 13, 2009 at 13:33:25 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Good points both (0.00 / 0)

But I don't know what, in the Governor's mind distinguishes this case from those. I wish he would withdraw her nomination and give her the opportunity to thrive in the private sector instead of keeping her on as my (and everyone else in NH's) lawyer.  

---

by: measurestaken @ Fri Mar 13, 2009 at 18:32:33 PM CDT

[ Parent ]