Archive for the 'Mayberry, Sarah' Category

IA-03: Lamberti push-polling?

Gordon Fischer of Iowa True Blue, and former Director of the Iowa Democratic Party, got an interesting phone call the other night. The permalinks for his posts aren’t working at his site, so, I hope he doesn’t mind but I’m reposting his entry in full below:

“Last night I was at home, reading. The phone rang. It was one of those annoying taped messages. But it caught my interest, because the call said something like:

“This is a two part survey.

Al Gore strongly criticized President Bush for wiretapping American citizens without a warrant. Congressman Leonard Boswell supports President Bush’s wiretapping program.

If you agree with President Bush’s wiretapping program, press 1.

If you disagree with President Bush’s wiretapping, press 2.

If you are unsure, press 3.”

[I pressed 3. I’m really not sure].

The voice continued:

“Here is the second — and last — question. Do you support the re election of Congressman Leonard Boswell?

If you support Congressman Boswell’s re election, press 1.

If you do not support Congressman Boswell’s re election, press 2.”

[I pressed 1.]

Thank you for your time.” CLICK.

So, the question before us, is Senator Lamberti push polling? To be frank, I don’t know who paid for the poll. But I highly doubt Congressman Boswell did — why would he highlight his support of President Bush’s wiretapping program? It’s highly controversial. I also doubt a media organization did — the mix of the two questions seem odd for a TV station or newspaper.

The only way the call makes any sense to me is if Senator Lamberti paid for it. I don’t know that he did. But it sure seems like the call was designed to reach hardcore Democrats — like myself — and tie Congressman Boswell to an unpopular program by an unpopular President (even more unpopular among Dems). Then, you follow up with a support/don’t support question, trying to peel away Dems from Congressman Boswell (which Senator Lamberti would have to do to win).

If Senator Lamberti was involved with the poll in any way, its a bit sleazy. There was no mention — no mention whatsoever — of Senator Lamberti and his campaign. And the stuff about Al Gore could almost trick someone into thinking its a Democratic survey.

Once more, I don’t know who is responsible for the poll. But Senator Lamberti — just to clear the air — ought to say whether he did or didn’t have something to do with the poll.”

He followed up with a post where he said he got several emails from other readers confirming the calls — his readers had gotten the same kind of calls. This is the first time I’ve heard of any calls of this nature, but I wouldn’t be surprised to see them happening.

Sen. Lamberti’s receiving a big amount of help from the Republican Party of Iowa and I think it would be pretty downright slimy of them to be conducting these kinds of polls. Like Gordon says, I think that Sen. Lamberti should definitely clear the air and state whether he had anything to do with this or not.

And if all else fails, we can ask Sarah “Batshit Crazy” Mayberry. I hear she’s helping Lamberti out down at the RPI. Nothing like grooming the wingnuts for support when they’re so young.

Adventures on the Battlelines of Iowa Politics

Chris requested that I share the following political tale with y’all, though in the interests of my pretend objectivity, I will attempt to make it as observational as possible. Here goes.

Last Friday, the Iowa Republican Party and Sen. Grassley sponsored an event on social security featuring William Shipman of the Cato Institute as speaker. In the interests of my political education, I went with a friend of mine in a position at the party to get these kinds of invitations. He is 18, I am 8 months shy of it and on a Friday night, we’re going to a social security event. Oh, and its snowing. I know, we’re real cool cats.

The event is at the Point of Grace church in Waukee. As you might imagine, an overtly political event at a church is the first source of my wariness. I would argue that God has little interest on either side of the debate, but hey, I’m just crazy like that. At any rate, the e-mail mentions the venue can seat about 900 people and those seats are avaliable on a first-come, first-serve basis. And my, did they ever speak too soon. My friend and I are perhaps two of about 30, and with the exception of a few Drake Republicans and a young couple in their mid-20s sitting beside me, the only two people not political candidates, their staffers or of an age to currently be on social security. Second little bit of warriness - - the elephants really haven’t hit the key demographic for the issue here.

So I am sitting in essentially the middle of this auditorium. Above and to my left is the very respectable former governor of this state Robert Ray and his wife. On the other side are state candidates for Secretaries of Agriculture and State with staffers. And on my immediate right is this young couple. As staffers were handing out literature, the husband said something to the effect of “Personal retirement accounts … that’s what we’re here for” as if the event was indeed designed to hand them out. Below me and to the far left was a cadre of college students, among them was a young lady I believe is Sarah Mayberry. There are times when I know I am the more politically conservative member of a group of people. There are times when the tables are turned. The latter are often far more obvious.

Shipman’s opening act is the rabelrouser of the Iowa 05 Steve King. I have, admittedly, very little experience with or opinion on the congressman, other than my elementary understanding of engineering from childhood toys which suggests a giant wall along a river is a bad idea. The major highlight of the Congressman’s speech was a physical copy of one of the many bonds the government issues itself to fund social security, one that was sitting in a file cabinet in West Virginia, apparently. He defers to Shipman as a “world expert”, as does everybody else in the room.

Shipman speaks. He is not, by any means, bad. However, he is speaking to an audience who all believe, including myself (yes, I know, I’m bracing myself for the comments) that the system is probably unsoluable and that some sort of reform somehow is necessary. The Cato package, I note, is decidedly different from the Bush package in that it calls for 5% of income in very diverse market funds of thousands of stocks and bonds administered by a supposedly independent broker. The problem here is that, outside of an audience which has made up its mind, the arguments would never fly. The social security debate has been dominated by two sides throwing numbers at each other, and that’s why the public never caught onto it. Shipman doesn’t feel the need to extend that bridge to the public, doesn’t seem to even want to argue outside of the economics, and completely blows off my question. About an hour and a half later, my friend and I walk out.

Here’s the kicker, and anybody involved in party politics better listen right here: I never got the sales pitch. In a very small audience of people, when it was obvious I had an above average interest in politics (it’s Friday night, after all), I was only handed one flyer: for a $50/plate fundraising dinner featuring Steve Forbes. No petitions, no forms for more information on the party, no conversations with either one of the candidates in the room, nothing. Its as if the party didn’t want to aknowledge that 18-year-olds exist. It will be hard for me, sitting in DC filling out my absentee ballot in late October without previous voting affiliation, to forget how the party essentially ignored me. A clear opportunity to get the young energy they need, and they failed. The event was little more than backpatting for party operatives.

On the way home, I wonder why no high school student groups and only a few college students bothered to show up, when the issue of social security is supposed to be most critical to the young. I wonder why the only politician, big or small, to come through my high school in the last four years was Dennis Kucinich. And I wonder if either party in its current form can exist forty years from now with this kind of non-strategy.

More on the misleading NSA poll

On Wednesday I had a post discussing the ridiculousness of this Rasmussen poll that said only 2/3 of Americans support monitoring communications on “terrorism suspects.” Not only was the question biased and terribly worded, what is even worse is that only 2/3 of America think that terrorism suspects should be spied on. That’s when you know something just isn’t right–usually a good indicator that some Americans just aren’t happy about the revelation of the Bush-ordered warrrantless wiretaps.

On that post, Chase added this comment, which is worthy of being on the front page.

“Even if this question weren’t tilted (and it is) it doesn’t matter. The wiretaps aren’t a democratic question, nor should they be. America is a constitutional democratic republic. The word “constitutional” means their are certain things (rights) protected from either the actions of the democracy (the people) or the republic (its elected leaders). While the FISA court is by no means perfect (I’m hoping this situation will beget reforms), its existance as part of 4th amendment jurisprudence means that it is part of the constitutional framework and thus is ultimately more fundamental than the opinions of the democracy or the republic.”

Now, I’m sure that the opinions of the people do matter in this case, at least to the legislators who help make FISA fit within the framework and constraints of past 4th Amendment jurisprudence. But ultimately, Chase is right–the FISA court and the statute itself shouldn’t necessarily be changed at the beck and call of public opinion, just like other policy that shouldn’t be changed because of one bad news report.

Anyway, in other news on the poll, I was wondering how long it would take some conservative Iowa blog to begin mentioning the Rasmussen poll as a way to show that the American people supported Bush and that it doesn’t matter that the program is illegal. Buster at In Muscatine dutifully rose to the task with this post.

“Well, well, well… guess what this means? Chris the Political Sore-Ass backed the wrong horse, that’s what ! I may not be the sharpest tool in the shed when it comes to things political, but I do know this - impeachment of Bush isn’t going to happen on 23%.”

While the nickname is getting old quick, it’s good to know that Buster admits he’s not the sharpest tool because I have never once claimed that Bush should be impeached because of this act. Other Democrats might, but I’m not one of them. He also states that since 66% of Americans back spying on “terrorism suspects” that undoubtedly public opinion will shape the interpretation of Bush’s actions and thus make it acceptable. If only public opinion really defined how the law worked. OJ probably would’ve been found guilty if Buster is right about his public opinion legality theory.

The funniest thing that I found in Buster’s post was this assinine prediction:

“The Democrats are going to come back from vacation and claim they backed the President the whole time, but they just wanted to make sure he was doing the job the right way. Bunch o’ liars.”

If this happens–which it won’t–I’ll officially change the name of this site to the Political Sore-Ass for an entire month. And you can quote me on that.

As for the rest of the post, we hear the usual wingnut attacks on liberals’ patriotism and Buster calls us, especially me, a traitor. Whatever. If I was a traitor, would I try to be changing the government and policies of government in a way that is democratic–by advocating free speech, a difference of opinions, and by having active dicourse? No, I’d probably be plotting ways to grab power and maybe even change the government violently. Liberals don’t play people for the naivete and then do exactly the opposite of what they want; we leave that up to the Washington Republicans while we campaign and run on the real issues and our attempts to followthrough with them.

Changing leaders and political parties isn’t a traitorous act, its an act of democracy. If you don’t like democracy, then leave. I hear China’s nice minus the terrible pollution.

And just for the record, Buster is officially a member of the Batshit Crazy Club. Sarah Mayberry now has a friend. Thanks to Pat for the pseudo-nomination.

More tales from batshit crazy land

Sarah Mayberry has gone of the deep end and is now trying to take everyone else down with her. When will the Times Delphic decide to fire her ass…or at least make her the humor columnist instead of the Republican one. You can find her column from earlier this week in the extended entry. Like last time, pick out your favorite quote and just laugh and laugh at her.

And I hear she appreciates being called the Ann Coulter of college journalism. That’s pretty fucked up.
Continue reading ‘More tales from batshit crazy land’

‘Nice Try Brigage’

I really like this effort by Josh Marshall:

“Would you like to join our ‘Nice Try’ brigade?

Let me explain.

There is one Democratic member of Congress who is currently the target of a Justice Department investigation, Rep. William Jefferson of New Orleans. There are also various Democrats who received money from Jack Abramoff or his many clients.

But let’s get real. The Abramoff story is overwhelmingly a Republican scandal. Abramoff’s whole racket was as a paymaster and slush-funder for the DC GOP machine.

Then there are the half-a-dozen Republican members of Congress being investigated for criminal infractions arising out of the Abramoff investigation. Then there are all their staffers.

[. . .]The simple truth is that Democrats in Washington today just aren’t in a position to be corrupt on any serious scale for a simple reason: public corruption is almost always about selling power. Got no power and you’ve just got nothing to sell. Any idiot can understand that.”

It isn’t usual for Josh to get so snarky and pissy, but I like it. It really is an amazing post. In Washington, the corruption is almost entirely Republican. Partly as a result of the K Street Project, but also from a decade of leadership without focus and without ethics.

Any spin coming from Republicans is really just a bunch of bullshit, if you ask me. This is their problem and they should own up to it. Now, I agree with many Democrats who argue that if Democrats are caught up in some kind of corruption or ethical investigation then they’re simply collateral damage. We’re absolutely better off without them.

I was, however, a bit worried this morning when I read this AP piece at ABC News about Jack Abramoff and Sen. Byron Dorgan (D-ND). Then I read this diary at Daily Kos and this from TPM Cafe and realized how much of a joke the AP article really is. This article from The Forum, a paper from the Fargo area of North Dakota I think pretty easily handles the whole deal. In essence, it’s just someone clamoring to be the first member of the Nice Try Brigade.

How long until Sarah Mayberry starts talking about how corrupt Democrats are when compared to Republicans? I’ll have that report for you when it happens, because we all know she’s batshit crazy.

How to become batshit crazy: A tale by Sarah Mayberry

Below the fold, you’ll find the full column of TD columnist and Drake College Republicans president Sarah Mayberry that led me to officially declare her “batshit crazy.” It is a distinction I give very few folks, so congratulations to Miss Mayberry.

In the comments, please highlight your favorite crazy quote of hers. This will be fun.

And if you’re curious as to where I got the text already typed up (and no, I didn’t do it myself), you’ll just have to remain curious. My source has asked for anonymity and I plan on keeping a pledge of anonymity until subpoenaed. Enjoy.
Continue reading ‘How to become batshit crazy: A tale by Sarah Mayberry’


Subscribe

Subscribe to my RSS Feeds

Categories