Joe Pistone, a.k.a Donnie Brasco, has been booked - not on criminal charges, for heaven's sake - to arrive in Northern Ohio on July 21 for a major shindig to honor auto dealer Tom Ganley in his quest for the 13th District congressional seat. That's the word from the Ganley camp, who are ecstatic that they can present to the voters a star-quality supporter who likes Ganley. (The recent fund-raising visit by John Boehner doesn't - and shouldn't - count). You may recall a movie that was sort of based on Pistone's life as an FBI undercover operative who infiltrated the New York Mafia for six years and lived to tell about it.
Jeff Longstreth, Ganley's campaign manager, has no further details at this time for the visit. He also says that's the extent of their plans for possible others, although more will be forthcoming. Ganley, who will be 68 this year, wants to reinforce his image as a tough law-and-order guy, and believes FBI has an accommodating sound to it in his bid to defeat Rep. Betty Sutton, the Democrat.
For the moment the Ganley campaign has been relying on TV ads to soak up some of the millions that are being set aside. But Longstreth dismisses questions that his boss will spend $6 million - the figure tossed around when Ganley, a severe conservative, was a senate candidate. But Sutton is already taking advantage of Ganley's campaign wealth by reminding her supporters to be generous with contributions to at least make a dent in his costly high-maintenance campaign to send him to Washington.
Posts
25 comments:
What is a "severe conservative?"
It's only two words and shouldn't be that hard to figure out, Alo.
Alo's own blogger profile provides the definition; it's a conservative with clenched butt cheeks.
Alo Konsen,
I just checked out your webpage and ended up bookmarking it. It is refreshing to read a blog that contains substantive analysis of important issues and not perpetual namecalling and insults.
I particularly enjoyed your posts regarding economics. We have to start holding the left accountable for their backwards, dumbed down economic policies. Your posts regarding Betty Sutton and "Cash for Clunkers" did just that. Great job!
How touching
No need to be coy, Abe. C'mon. Enlighten me, O Brilliant One. What makes Tom Ganley a "severe conservative?"
ReaganFan84, thanks for the compliment.
I think you're looking for an opening here . Sorry, but you should know that you're not playing with kids. So drop your bait in another pond. Besides, I don't want to butt in on your private conversation with the Reagan guy.
Alo Conman/Bonzofan84 - I have a question - Have either of you ever had an original thought?
Conman - your dependency on Drudge, Anderson and Brietbart for your drivel is clearly apparent. Fact free claims of political realities are the stock and trade for the wingnut crowd. Your sycophantic tendencies are a clear manifestation what social psychologist call - right wing authoritarianism(RWA). You might want to consult the writings of Robert Altemeyer in order to understand your pathology.
Bonzofan84, I'm still waiting for your response from a previous post. What's wrong? Waiting for someone to tell you what to say!
As for Ganley, he is a typical "teabagger", anti-government unless he can firmly place his lips around the public tit. Then, he hopes no one will notice. Besides a closer review of his business practices show that he is very familiar with the Judicial system. Now there is a law and order candidate for you.
Your refusal to back up your characterization of Ganley as a "severe conservative" speaks volumes. Guess I hit a nerve, huh, guys? So much for liberal openmindedness. Please do continue painting the entire GOP as extreme racist violent wingnut teabagger puppy-eating Satan-worshippers!!!1!!1eleventy! It's working out wonderfully for you so far.
Alo, thanks for unclenching your butt cheeks long enough to crap out a denial that you're not all Satan worshiping puppy killers.
"Severe" means among other things - strict. How upset do you think Ganley would get being called a strict conservative?
Severe, strict, extreme ... blahblahblah. So far you're just bandying adjectives.
Tell me what beliefs a person has to hold to qualify for your label. A preference for free market solutions over government intervention? A conviction that individual rights come from God and not from human institutions? A belief that human life is sacred and begins at conception? A belief that the federal entitlements need to shrink? Support for a stronger military? Opposition to ObamaCare?
Maybe all it takes is having anything but (D) after your name on the ballot, or objecting to whatever trendy statist Cause du Jour currently enjoys Hollywood's favor. You tell me, champ.
Alo exercising his God given right to read from the Book of Beck on a liberal blog. Merit badge earned.
Personally, I still think Ganley would be just fine with the label strict conservative. If you have a better adjective Alo, why don't you let us know what it is.
Help us please.
Conman - thank you for proving my point and Altmeyer's. Your response is classic RWA. Boiler plate nonsense repeated as dogma. You might reflect on the fact that your rigid orthodoxy is very much like what was found in the USSR. Intellectual "Potemkin villages" constructed for appearance and not substance in order to fool the uniformed.
You are a walking, talking wingnut cliche.
Care to answer the following questions:
Why are you for a strong military?
What defines life?
What god?
Will you voluntarily give up or refrain from using any program found in the HCR bill?
Define "free market''?
Alo Konsen,
If you are looking for intellectual discourse then you picked the wrong blog. All you will get here is a steady stream of namecalling: teabagger this, racist that....not to mention a strange obsession with Fox News and Rush Limbaugh. There really isn't any substantive analysis of important issues.
It is no wonder that the left has lost the public debates over the stimulus, Obamacare, and Arizona's immigration law. When you can't win on the facts all you have left is namecalling. Hence the narrative the past 6 months or so of the violent, racist "teabaggers". They are obviously trying to marginalize any opposition to avoid addressing the substance of their criticisms.
If you can't debate, just smear!!!
Hey, Reagan 007: Alo has his own damn blog, I'm told, so instead of using Grumpy Abe as your medium why don't you invite him over fpr a beer and, on bended knee, ask Pat Robertson to pray for both of you. The reason I'm trying to ignore your comments - as you have on questions from others - is that they are worthless, even as casual conversation. Have you given any thought to learning how to use an umbrella when it's raining?
RF84 & Alo continuously bitch about the food and the service here and yet they can't seem to stop ordering from the menu day after day.
Boys, look up the Rule of Holes the next time you get a minute..... save yourself some angst.
Grumpy Abe,
If you want me to stop posting on your blog I will. I think the back and forth makes things interesting, and I have always been respectful. It is all in fun.
Can't you answer my challenge, Mencken? I was hoping you could muster up something more substantive than sneering Alinsky-like venom.
My answers to joe, in order:
1) I favor a strong military because we Americans and our Constitution are worth defending. That requires a military. To minimize attacks, it must be a strong one.
2) An argument defining human life: here.
3) The only God that exists; the God of the Bible.
4) If there's any alternative left, heck yes.
5) A system where buyers and sellers can voluntarily exchange goods/services without government interference (beyond the least taxation required for legitimate gov't functions) and with government protection (enforcement of contracts, protection of property rights).
Two links to a site called "Brain Shavings" as support for your arguments? Is that as good as it gets?
Sadly your link to "God" didn't work. I really wanted to know where that was going.
Who here ever argued for weakening the military and against free trade? Are you hearing voices? Quit projecting so much and you might get a little more respect around here.
BTW, I'll take the Alinsky mention as a compliment.
Alo Conman,
Thanks for you response, but I find you answers meaningless.
On defense, How strong? Nearly $700 billion in 2011 and it buys us nothing. We spend more on defense than all the rest of the world combined and yet we are bogged down in the two longest wars in American history with no end in sight. Ike's warning is now a fact and has in the process threatens the very foundation of our civil society. Our Constitution is indeed threaten, not from some foreign source, but from within. Like to comment on the use of torture or preemptive war?
Cognition is what separate human's from all other forms of life. To cite your own drivel is really bad form.
As for your belief system, you are free to believe anything thing you like. But for those of us who look at your position as superstitious nonsense you'll have to do better. Faith is not fact and should never be part of any political discussion unless you are willing to loose you tax exempt status.
And if there is no alternative? Tell me, is health care a right or a privilege? Why?
I suggest you read "the Wealth of Nations" and ween yourself of the narcissism preached by Rand and her disciples. Atlas did not shrug but squatted over the destruction of our economy and society.
You answers are wingnut talking points. You've demonstrated little depth or understanding. If you want to play you'll need to bring more to the table.
Bonzofan84. What's wrong? Mad because no one will take you serious? Besides, if the should fits you should indeed wear it.
Two links to a site called "Brain Shavings" as support for your arguments? Is that as good as it gets?
Check the byline on the blog, genius.
My point exactly. Citing yourself as a source? That is genius. How about a quote from your mother about what a good boy you were ?
*sigh*
You are quite a pedantic little bugger, aren't you?
I linked to my arguments so that I wouldn't have to retype everything here, brainiac. Deal with the argument on its own merits, instead of complaining about where it's posted or who wrote it.
Hey Mencken, are you Kyle, TimJayFitz, Brian, or Greg?
If you actually knew those guys, you'd know that I'm none of them.
Anyway, a website that discusses the death of Jesus and features 50 or so derogatory nicknames for President Obama is beyond satire.
All Christians are equal, but some Christians are more equal than others. I think St. Orwell said that.
This is as far down the rabbit hole as I'm chasing you Alo.
Post a Comment