Comments on Vance Phillips’ “Rousing Speech”

Filed in Uncategorized by on May 20, 2007

Over at FSP, Dave Burris has posted the text of a speech given by Vance Phillips yesterday, but he closed the comments. I believe this is symbolic of how the Republicans like it. Top-down leadership. We don’t want to hear what people think about it this. It’s just a press release.

Well, luckily, you can comment on Vance’s speech here.

Update:  Looks like FSP has opened the comments section.  Good show.

Tags:

About the Author ()

Comments (33)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

  1. FSP says:

    Yeah. That’s me. You got me.

    It would be really ironic had you heard the speech I gave before Vance’s.

  2. liberalgeek says:

    Then why close the comments? I do know you, I think. I fear that you don’t want Vance to see people say bad things about his analysis. Do you have a more satisfying reasoning?

  3. Mike says:

    Ah! This is helpful. And your link to the Phillips speech shows up as a comment on FSP.

    Anyway…

    Mr. Phillips’ speech was interesting. He’s clearly a fire-breather. But his imagery worries me just a tad. As a democrat, am I in danger of being split in two by battle-axe wielding Vance if I walk too closely to a group of republics?

  4. liberalgeek says:

    excellent. I find that if you just laugh when everyone else laughs, Vance will assume that you too are a Republican. You can always confuse him by saying something like “Taxes suck.” They will forget all about slicing you in half for a good 20 minutes.

  5. FSP says:

    It was not a “guest post,” nor was it my own piece, and since I did it without the author’s permission, I thought I’d let it stand on its own.

    No ulterior motive.

    I thought the imagery in the speech was appropriate. This is a long way from fire-breathing or threatening.

    But if you’re a Delaware Dem, you probably aren’t ready for what’s coming.

  6. liberalgeek says:

    Ha! Yeah we are probably not ready. You won the 41st, but I know that you guys felt that you had to win it. The Dem was not endorsed by anyone on this blog. This is because he wasn’t really a Dem. He was a Dixiecrat that was in bed with NRG. I know that you put in long, hard hours to get Hasting elected, and I hope we get a wind farm out of it.

    As for the next election, I think you should start thinking about the excuses that you can use for losing. You guys need to disengage from Bush and actively oppose his war on the Constitution. You may have a shot then. But the one thing that all Republicans have going against them in the next election is that they will all have R’s next to their names.

  7. ATCP says:

    “Actively oppose his war on the Constitution.”

    That’s funny, saying Democrats have been at war with the Constitution ever since FDR believed it irrelevant when he pushed through his new deal programs against the will of the supreme court. It’s about time someone, be it GWB or any other Republican, fought back and stood up for the original principles this country was founded on: Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Abortion ends life, Overreaching government seizes liberty, and economic stagnationary policies hinder the pursuit of happiness– All supported by Democrats!

    There’s a new kid on the block- and he just called you out!

  8. “We don’t want to hear what people think about it this. It’s just a press release.”

    Far from it Huckleberry Hound Dog.
    Vance speach was outstanding but the Dave Burris presence charged up the room. I forsee, in two year Vance State Chair and Dave State Vice-Chair. Starsky and Hutch will ride !

    Come see that Kilroy’s Political Mosh Pit has to say! http://kilroyspmp.blogspot.com/
    Kilroy Was Here and now has a twins
    http://kilroysdelaware.blogspot.com/2007/05/kilroy-is-proud-new-papa-of-twins.html

    Where was Aunt Bea and Pool Boy Carney , no show at the Newark Memorial Day Parade today, So much for supporting our troops!

  9. Mike says:

    There’s a new kid on the block- and he just called you out!

    Okay. But who the F— are you? It’s not a call-out if your aren’t there when the geek comes out the door of the bar.

  10. Mike says:

    Dave. You probably should have waited to ask Vance. My guess is he’d have been proud to have his speech posted, and I doubt that he would mind the comments.

    It could have used a tiny bit more context. Your intro was clear, but I was not aware that the republic party as planning a convention this week-end. I worked it out based on my newspaper reading this morning. A reader of your archives in a few years may be left scratching his or her head.

    My snarkiness might just as readily been applied in response to a speech from a democrat. What bugs me is s the incessant war imagery, us-agin-them approach, and apocalyptic tone (I may be over-reacting on that last bit).

    I suppose that sort of thing is a staple of party politics. But it’s not for me. It seems like the sort of thing that just makes our red/blue divide even worse.

  11. Mike says:

    Geek, Dave has changed up and opened comments on the Phillips speech at FSP. I’m now completely confused…..

  12. FSP says:

    Mike. Don’t be confused. Geek is my conscience. Whenever he is disappointed in my actions, I race as fast as I can to repent and change.

  13. liberalgeek says:

    HA!

    Oh Crap, I’m a Republican conscience. There goes my credibility.

  14. anon. says:

    Dave, one question if you didn’t have Sir Vances’ permission how did you get a copy of his speech? looks like a stunt to me.

  15. FSP says:

    I took it out of his folder.

    It’s not like the guy’s going to beat me to a pulp. I nominated him for crying out loud.

  16. Mike says:

    It’s not like the guy’s going to beat me to a pulp. I nominated him for crying out loud.

    And you have a few pounds on him. Good pounds!

  17. motsmitty says:

    And you have a few pounds on him. Good pounds!

    Snark! I love it! Beat me to it, too! Why I oughtta…

  18. Kilroy Was Here says:

    “Dave, one question if you didn’t have Sir Vances’ permission how did you get a copy of his speech? looks like a stunt to me.”

    It was a public speech not a phone call! Vance gave the speech therefore the receiver is not bound legally not to communicate back to anyone he wishes. Now if Dave published it and sold it at a price then we have a legal issue.

    The bottom-line is Dave Burris and Vance Phillips are the kind of people to move the Delaware GOP back where we belongs, in control.

    Minner has trashed this state and Democrat rank and file doesn’t give a rat’s as long as they win. Wasn’t the goal of winning to make the quality of life better for the rank and file? But then again 2/3 the rank and file are state employees.

  19. Disbelief says:

    Instead of the broad strokes like “Democrats Rule!” or “GOP Sucks”, how about we focus and the strengths and qualities of each individual opponent? The GOP tactic of marginalizing the candidate in general terms because of party registration is insipid.

  20. Kilroy Was Here says:

    “how about we focus and the strengths and qualities of each individual opponent?”

    That is what Independents do and look at their power base or lack of

  21. I took it out of his folder.

    *
    hoot!
    I wish I could have a peek at that bundle of boondoggle that is Vance Phillips.
    That man tried to rip off his own cousin.

  22. FSP says:

    Another Nancy-ism. Wayne Smith is gone and now you have a new guy to twist stories around about?

  23. anon. says:

    Twist stories about? Dave, it was front page News Journal for weeks, and ended up in court, for crying out loud!!! If my memory serves me correct, he offered to take the farm “off thier hands” for a measly 250,000. It was appraised at 1.5 million. What a guy.

  24. Disbelief says:

    Oh, good. Another warm, fuzzy Republican. Does Vance get phone calls from DeLay?

  25. FSP says:

    Oh, okay. If it was on the front page of the News-Journal, it MUST be true.

    ‘Cause they NEVER get anything wrong…

  26. anon. says:

    Dave, it was true. The media doesn’t say your in court just for the hell of it. Also you stated over at FSP that “Vance won every election district east of 113”. You failed to mention that he lost the 2 E.D.’S where people know him best. Laurel, his home town.

  27. FSP says:

    Both Mr. Hyland and Mr. Phillips live in the 4th of the 40th. Mr. Hyland won that district by 24 votes.

    Vance won the 40th district overall by 316 votes, and the election by 1450 votes.

    The point was that Vance is from the west side and doesn’t care about the east side, when his district extends all the way to the ocean.

    On the east side, where supposedly his decisions are having an adverse impact, he won the 38th district by 10%, almost 400 votes. So it appears as though those voters don’t accept the theme you’re trying to promote.

  28. anon. says:

    Dave, fair enough. I get the point you are trying to make, but 56% is hardly a “solid majority” for a three term imcumbent against a virtual unknown.

  29. Nancy Willing says:

    Honey, Wayne Smith ain’t gone anywhere, neither has Roger Roy, get real.
    *
    You can’t make Vance’s very public past sins go away just because you want them to, Dave.

    *
    Sussex has a big problem with opening up county level government. The Citizens for a Better Sussex have FOIA’d council for information on the terms by which public money is being given over to the Sussex Land Trust (A Vance controlled agency) for purchase of land. There has been no compliance with law as yet CBS has not been given the documentation they seek.

  30. FSP says:

    “the Sussex Land Trust (A Vance controlled agency) for purchase of land”

    That’s as true today as it was the first time you told it. Vance Phillips does not control the Sussex County Land Trust.

    You can say it over and over and over and it is still not true.

    Face it, Nance, it is simply not a good idea for anyone to believe what you write.

  31. JOAN DEAVER says:

    delawareonline | NEWS JOURNAL

    SUSSEX FARM GOING TO AUCTION AFTER RELATIVES’ DISPUTE
    COURT SETTLEMENT CALLS FOR SALE OF PROPERTY NEAR BETHEL
    VANCE PHILLIPS WAS ACCUSED BY HIS COUSIN JEFFREY PHILLIPS OF UNDERVALUING THE FARM.

    News Journal file/GARY EMEIGH
    The 139-acre western Sussex County farm of the late John Marshall Phillips was the subject of a court case between cousins.

    By MOLLY MURRAY
    The News Journal
    01/06/2006
    With the prices of farmland in western Sussex County averaging $15,000 to $20,000 per acre, Seaford-area real estate agent Raymond Adkins didn’t think it was unreasonable to ask $2.4 million for the 139-acre farm of the late John Marshall Phillips.

    But in four months, there hasn’t been a purchase contract.

    So now, the property near Bethel will be sold at auction under terms of a Chancery Court agreement reached in September by the Phillips cousins.

    Adkins said he isn’t sure what to expect but “I’ve been to a lot of real estate auctions and I haven’t seen a bargain.”

    The push to sell the farm came amid a dispute over the way Vance Phillips was handling his late uncle’s estate.

    The court case attracted attention because Phillips, a Laurel-area Republican, farmer and real estate agent, serves on Sussex County Council.

    Phillips’ cousin, Jeffrey Phillips, contended in court papers that Vance Phillips undervalued the farm, did little to publicize an earlier auction that was canceled days before it was set to occur, rejected one bid offer for the farm and ultimately accepted a lesser offer to sell the farm to his own father.

    The settlement came in September as the case was about to go to trial. The details – including a time line for the sale of the farm – are outlined in court papers.

    Vance Phillips declined to comment Thursday, saying only that under the court agreement, he was prohibited from talking about the case or the terms of the settlement.

    Jeffrey Phillips’ attorney, Beth Miller, said she was concerned that the real estate agent had not had enough flexibility to market the property and find a buyer.

    Miller said there was a soft offer for the farm of $1.3 million but potential buyers had limited opportunities to look at the farm or take routine steps such as having soil samples taken. Soil samples are important indicators of the suitability of land for septic systems.

    Adkins said buyers typically need time to do a feasibility study – something that usually takes at least 180 days. Under the court agreement, no contingencies were allowed as a part of a sale contract.

    Desirable property

    The settlement agreement also required that the farm be sold within four months of Sept. 2, 2005, or be sold at auction. Under the terms of the agreement, Vance Phillips had the option to match any offer.
    “It made it a little difficult,” Adkins said.

    Adkins said there was interest in the property. It is desirable because it is near Bethel, a historic community along the Broad Creek, and other developments in the area feature higher-priced homes, he said.
    In addition, Adkins said that other farm property is selling in similar price ranges. For instance, he said, he has 70 acres near Seaford under contract for more than $2 million.

    The Phillips farm is now protected from development until 2008 under a state farmland preservation program.

    But in court documents, a state agriculture official said the designation would have little impact on the land value because the land had value as a farm and once the designation expired, the property could be developed.

    One of Jeffrey Phillips’ key issues in the court case was whether his late father’s land was undervalued. An appraisal commissioned by Vance Phillips set the value of the farm at $389,000. A later appraisal commissioned by Jeffrey Phillips set the value at $628,000. Adkins set the asking price at $2.4 million.

    Deadline passes

    Jeffrey Phillips went to court when he learned that Vance Phillips had agreed to sell the farm to his father at the appraised value of $389,000. That contract was voided by the court settlement.

    Under the terms of the settlement, the auction must be held on or before March 1 if the property was not under a sales contract by Jan. 2. Adkins, who is responsible for making the auction arrangements, said he is in the process of contacting auctioneers.
    “It takes two people to make an auction,” he said.

    Contact Molly Murray at 856-7372 or mmurray@delawareonline.com.

  32. We know how things operate in your county, Dave. Not one hell of a lot differently than in mine.

    You have to straddle your self carefully on that fence you are on about open government in Sussex, or you’ll get stretched way too thin.

  33. Disbelief says:

    Looks to me like good ol’ Vance tried to fuck his cousin. Now in Sussex, that ain’t exactly uncommon, but when the screwin’ is done to the tune of a million bucks, why, we rednecks do take some offense.

    Is this guy Vance related to the Mayor of Smyrna?