Wagner to Burris: Go fuck yourself.
Obviously, that is a paraphrase of Wagner’s response to Dave Burris’ letter to Dick Cathcart asking, “Why the fuck in Wagner still pulling this bullshit and not being called on it?”
Again, that was a paraphrase.
Dave better watch out of Gilligan may have one of those “chance” meetings with Wagner that he is known for.
pssst Jason… send out some directions or something.
My web mail is all messed up. See the post above.
Ah, it took so much courage for Dave to sign a letter that didn’t mention Wagner by name in lieu of not calling her out specifically on his blog for her maleficence like Democratic blogs (yours, mine, Matthews, others) do all the time for their own bad actors: Adams, McDowell, DeLuca….
Don’t mention her name on the letter or your blog so as not to break faith w/ Reagan’s 11th commandment but then get the benefits of the letter being “accidentally” slipped to Celia Cohen and you can create the illusion of having stood up to Wagner’s infamy while giving yourself plausible deniablity that you have done so. It’s having your cake and eating it too.
Did you also get the impression that Wagner’s actions were a-OK except that it might cost the DE GOP the House majority this November?
I thought about the fact that he didn’t put it on the blog and wasn’t sure what to make of it.
As far as Wgner not being called out by name, that was pretty odd since it couldn’t have been more clear that it was Wagner.
If the letter signatories really believe the **unnamed legislator** might have violated the law, then why didn’t they ask Cathcart for an Ethics Committee investigation and possible hearing?
Clearly, they are just going through the motions to make a token protest to cover their butts from the charge of hypocrisy while at the same time sparing themselves from the charge that they explicitly went after Wagner.
It’s a total smokescreen.
Amen, Dana.
Really. Wagner is telling us all to go fuck ourselves. Her arrogance in her interview with Celia couldn’t make it more obvious.
I also think it is more correct to point out that DANA G is telling Burris to once again go fuck himself.
Who really thinks that Dick Cathcart will do anything? thats the question.
The long and short of all this issue is simple. On a bipartisan basis elected officials have used state jobs for themselves and others.
One lobbyist told me that he regarded legislators as “franchises” and their family members as “franchisees”. It takes only a few folks who have taken advantage of the system to make all of them look bad.
It is appropriate to change state law to reflect reality;
1. No elected official should be able to gain employment in an agency if they vote on that agency’s budget and could derive financial gain.
2. Same rule if they have a direct family member employed by the state.
Yes, these rules may be sen as tough but losing the confidence of the voters is much worse.
“I also think it is more correct to point out that DANA G is telling Burris to once again go fuck himself.”
It might be a grim & intolerable truth for you now, Smitty, but someday when you grow up, you’ll realize that hypocrites don’t only vote “D.” Sometimes they also vote “R.”
That Ethics Committee Hearing list “should be filled up by now”! They might have to start sub-committees, or Task Force l, (McDowell), Task Force 2, (Copeland) Task Force 3, Deluca, Task Force 4, Wagner!
Please feel free to add to the list! Perhaps the overwhelmed Ethics Committe would (for budget reasons) permit the citizens one big Task Force and investigate them all! “Independent Inspector General”.
Are you beginning to understand the overwhelming NEED for an INDEPENDENT
Inspector. Even Reverent Bullock tells voters it doesnt matter if your a republican or democrat in Delaware! Really Rev! Is really the Republicrat Party?
“Even Reverent Bullock tells voters it doesnt matter if your a republican or democrat in Delaware! Really Rev! Is really the Republicrat Party?”
He’s never said that. Prove that he said it, Liz.
Can you?
Smitty makes a good point. Wagner is really telling everyon outside of her district to go fuck themselves and telling people within her district “It is us against them.”
That’s the crappy part about our democratic system. If 2,500 people in her district might just buy that argument.
Dana, while Liz and I don’t agree on much, when a person changes political parties so they can run for an office, that is exactly what he is tacitly saying. He worked for Republicans in one election cycle, he runs against them in the next. If party affiliation doesn’t matter to him, it shouldn’t matter to you.
For the same reason that the motives of John Atkins should be examined by every voter on both sides, so should Bullock’s. He has chosen political affiliation to further his own chances at gaining (or re-gaining) power. Nothing more.
I’m not suggesting that changing political parties shouldn’t happen. If someone on any part of the political spectrum sees their own views are different from those around them, they should re-evauluate their surroundings. Those who have used their politics as a platform should be aware that there are consequences.
It did amaze me that I didn’t see anyone comment on that (her arrogance beyond her district). As soon as Dave’s name was mentioned beyond your jest, Wagner’s arrogance to all of us was totally missed. But hey, it has become the exercise du-jour anymore.
Back on point, I’m all for laying her out on this. I also caught the threat which amounts to, “you tell on me, I tell on you!” We’ve seen that card played before, oh about one year ago. In my mind, that caused one person to retire and become a lobbyist!
While there are indeed ethics questions on her over the epilogue language, how about simple morality questions over her indirect f-you to the entire state (minus her district, I guess)?
Like I said in my post about the trinity for Delarvae, I have news for Mrs. Wagner. By virtue of her being able to cast a vote that can ultimately affect the entire state of Delaware, I become a constituent of hers, as does the entire population. What gives her that putrid arrogance is that we can’t all cast a vote. Do remember what I said, they cast a vote on legislation, then we ARE ALL CONSTITUENTS.
I don’t know when I will have time for creating a post of my own, so feel free to comment rescue if you think it’s worth the attention.
I shouldn’t have played that “rag on Dave” card but I couldn’t resist. In my meek defense I don’t see Al Levin getting on the phone to round up signatures for this type of thing.
Anyway, you are right about the larger point. And to put it into a large context – the question is: Can you be great at “constituents relations” like a Wagner or a BHL or a John Atkins and blow off every other thing related to the state’s stewardship and get re-elected and re-elected and re-elected.
The answer appears to be yes.
It might be a grim & intolerable truth for you now, Smitty, but someday when you grow up, you’ll realize that hypocrites don’t only vote “D.” Sometimes they also vote “R.”
How do you not ever suffocate from your arrogance?
I don’t play that freaking game of “oh, the D’s are hypocrites and the R’s are perfect, blah blah blah.” I don’t do it because of those last three words, it’s all “blah, blah, blah.” I may call out individuals, but that is the extent. Just because someone is D or R doesn’t make them a hypocrite, jackoff, whatever. It’s because they are who they are that makes them those adjectives.
I think there are enough people around here now that know me enough to agree that I don’t play that useless game.
A while back I said that I think you really don’t know a damn thing about who I am. I fully believe that now. Sorry, but this isn’t about you, me, Dave, Jason, et al. Get over yourself and your little “gotcha” games.
RickJ,
Bullock was a Dem before he was a Repub. Besides, he was a member of the GOP since the mid 90s. He didn’t need to switch parties simply to run for office. The GOP went to him 1st to run against Carper.
He switched because of the war, the govt.’s reaction to Katrina, and the GOP’s favorite past time: screwing the most vulnerable in our society.
I may call out individuals, but that is the extent. Just because someone is D or R doesn’t make them a hypocrite, jackoff, whatever.
For the record, “jackoff” was part of the list of adjectives. I wasn’t referring to you.
“It did amaze me that I didn’t see anyone comment on that (her arrogance beyond her district). As soon as Dave’s name was mentioned beyond your jest, Wagner’s arrogance to all of us was totally missed.”
Well, Smitty, if you weren’t so preoccupied w/ having your nose up your chum’s backside, you’d realize what has been trippingly obvious to most people for some time: Wagner is arrogant. That’s hardly a scoop.
That she writes into the budget a job her hubby is sufficient evidence of arrogance…at least for those not otherwise engaged in local hero worship.
Wagner’s arrogance is a given. The news is the disguised hypocritical and timid response to her c0rrupt activities by the so-called GOP good government types. That Dave has made himself a lobbyist of these efforts and has not called for an Ethics evaluation of Wagner shows how he uses his non-partisan position for purely partisan purposes.
“I’m not suggesting that changing political parties shouldn’t happen. If someone on any part of the political spectrum sees their own views are different from those around them, they should re-evauluate their surroundings.”
OK. Here are Bullock’s political values. Tell me how GOP these are:
http://chrisbullock.org/issues.htm
He’s as Dem as any elected progressive Dem in DE.
Did I ever try to put forward her arrogance as a scoop? No, wanna know why? It’s because I don’t need my ego stroked in thinking, “I was first.”
Well, Smitty, if you weren’t so preoccupied w/ having your nose up your chum’s backside…
You ever hear of friendship? You know, the kind where it lasts beyond apparent usefullness in regards to popular opinion? Not many people around here grasp that, but Dave is a friend. Whether or not I agree or disagree with him is irrelevant to you, or it should be irrelevant. He’s been aware of my concerns and disappointments as well as my kudos in the past. Due to my friendship, I don’t hang that dirty laundry in public. Sorry that disappoints you.
Burris will appear at 10:00 on WDEL.
If he **explicitly calls** for an Ethics evaluation of Wagner before June of this year, I will praise him.
“OK. Here are Bullock’s political values. Tell me how GOP these are:”
I wonder if his stated opinions differed when he was a standard-bearer for the GOP.
Let me give you an example you may agree with more. When Joe Leiberman ran as an independent, defeating the primary winner, he was not doing so to advance the cause of independent voters, or the Democrat party, or the state of Connecticut. He ran as an independent to advance himself. Chris Bullock, principled though he may be, was a Republican to advance himself, and once advanced he became a Democrat to run for office. He either used one party or the other, not for the sanctity of his positions, but to elevate himself for greater personal glory.
This is evident when Atkins or Leiberman is doing it – I’m not sure why there’s a blind spot for Bullock.
If he **explicitly calls** for an Ethics evaluation of Wagner before June of this year, I will praise him.
Why would Burris – or for that matter anyone else on the planet – give a flying fuck what you think or who you praise?
Where do you get off thinking you’ve earned the right to praise or condemn anybody, just because you got your hands on some free software that lets you put your meager thoughts on the Web?
You tried to come after me once, and I let it get to me before I realized that the only significance you have in the world is that someone might stumble upon a blog and mistakenly think that you have some importance.
Knowledge, I don’t care what you think. And nothing you say will change anything I do.
“Let me give you an example you may agree with more. When Joe Leiberman ran as an independent, defeating the primary winner, he was not doing so to advance the cause of independent voters, or the Democrat party, or the state of Connecticut. He ran as an independent to advance himself.”
He ran as an Independent AFTER he lost a primary. I don’t see how the analogy works.
Atkins switched because he has been basically blackballed as a GOP candidate (pity that he didn’t steal money from the state treasury in the form of a paycheck for a relative, he might have received lighter handling from his GOPer comrades).
“Chris Bullock, principled though he may be, was a Republican to advance himself, and once advanced he became a Democrat to run for office. He either used one party or the other, not for the sanctity of his positions, but to elevate himself for greater personal glory.”
Since the 90s, Bullock has run for office 1 time in Chicago as a Repub. That sounds ambitious to you?
You can’t possibly know what Bullock’s motivations are.
Burris just said, “I’m not calling for an ethics evaluation on this” and it doesn’t rise to that level.”
I recorded it.
Unbelievable.
BREAKING: Dana Garrett records Dave Burris (and disregards everything else mentioned – even Bob Reeder noted the comment about DiPinto, Sullivan, et. al.).
Scoop alert!
Not only was Bullock a delegate to the 2004 GOP national convention that re elected Bush but he wasn’t even from Delaware at the time. He was an Illinois delegate. Bullock’s war position is just pandering.
“He was an Illinois delegate.”
So? Did everyone at the 2004 GOP convention agree w/ Bush on the war? Did you take a poll of the people who attended?
“even Bob Reeder noted the comment about DiPinto, Sullivan, et. al.”
Smokescreen. Totally irrelevant. DiPinto & Sullivan are not current elected House members.
So, we can then conclude that Bob Reeder’s acknowledgement was equally as much a smokescreen?
Reeder has a point about the focus he is using for Wagner. That aside, do you have any problem with the process being put up for review? I think it is safe to conclude that it isn’t a problem, but I’m wondering if it isn’t drenched with blood, then it isn’t an option.
Look, I have a big problem with what seems to be arrogance on her part about all of this. What is shameful is, in the lack of a clear-cut rule, there is a lack of control, or appearance thereof. In an attempt to drain the bathtub of the dirty water, don’t forget to first shut off the spigot.
Just wait till the truth comes out about how far in bed Bullock was with Terry Strine and the shadowy political funny money setup called ‘TURN’. Bullock headed it up for Strine. Apparently some of the $$ made their way back to at least one member of the pastor’s flock in sizable sum. It was some funny business that Bullock was up to his neck in with Strine. Wonder if Dana G will call for an investigation of Bullock.
Amused
“TURN”
Bring out the facts. Let’s see what you have. But when you do, be sure to post it under your name instead of posting your allegations anonymously which, as far as we know, could be pure bullshit.
Bullock is not only a Republican but was on TV a week or two ago with Richard ‘snake-oil-salesman” Korn saying there really is no difference between Republicans and Democrats in Delaware indicating his switch should be a trivial act. What a load of shit! Bullock then went on to trash the Republican Party. It appears Bullock is an equal-opportunity basher. Back in just 2001 Bullock saw fit to trash the Democrats with the following comments:
“I think the Democratic Party, in short, has promised African-Americans a four-course meal. But once we got to the table, all we received were appetizers. We’re still waiting for the meal.
“That kind of scenario does not work any longer for African- Americans who want to progress. I’m a Republican. I’m proud to be a Republican. And I believe that our president and vice president and Chairman Gilmore should continue to reach out to African Americans at the grassroots level. Reach out with a plan, with an agenda, particularly in urban American where we still have poverty, underemployment, disease and economic and social decadence.”
“So I think the Republican agenda, pro-business, pro-family, pro- faith, lower taxes and grassroots initiatives for economic and community development, for faith-based initiatives, is the way to go for the 21st century.”
http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0103/11/sm.07.html
Furthermore, Bullock back in 2004 was an official Delegate to the Republican Party cheering on Bush and Cheney at the convention that year while the War with Afghanistan and Iraq was being waged.
http://www.ifajs.org/record/politics/Black_Republican_Party_Leaders_2004.pdf
In an interview with Harvard Magazine in 2004, Bullock continues the bashing of the Democrats stating: “The Democratic Party offered an eight-course meal, but we’ve only gotten the appetizers,” he says. “Instead of waiting at the table to be served, let’s get in the kitchen and do our own cooking.” The article goes on to state: “Among those endorsing Ryan are former secretary of education William J. Bennett, J.D. ’71, former congressman and secretary of housing and urban Development Jack Kemp, and the Reverend Christopher Bullock, an African-American Baptist minister and current Bush-Cheney convention delegate who agrees with Ryan’s assessment that Democrats have failed to help minorities.”
http://harvardmagazine.com/2004/07/the-battle-for-illinois.html
As recently as 2006 Bullock was in charge of the Terry Strine Republican hatched organization known at TURN (The Underground Republican Network) recruiting African-Americans into the Republican Party. Some have suggested this organization (TURN) was really adapted by Bullock to put James Bonds to work for a no-show job for which Bonds collected a salary and Bullock shared.
http://www.udreview.com/home/index.cfm?event=displayArticle&ustory_id=e91629ee-f631-4cc4-b6b8-f08ca74b7a52&page=2
http://delawareyoungrepublicans.wordpress.com/category/uncategorized/
I have recently met with Rev. Christopher Bullock and found him to be very arrogant and he didn’t have the time of day for me nor cared to listen to my issues nor did he have any grasp of issues in general. After researching the above, I guarantee I will not be voting for this slime.
“So, we can then conclude that Bob Reeder’s acknowledgement was equally as much a smokescreen?”
You are characterizing Reeder’s words as is obvious from the simple fact that Reeder has called for an ethics hearing on Wagner for matters that INCLUDE her hubby’s job.
“That aside, do you have any problem with the process being put up for review? ”
Of course not. But it’s a false dilemma to suggest that you can’t ask for a review of the process AND call for an ethics hearing of Wagner.
“Look, I have a big problem with what seems to be arrogance on her part about all of this. ”
So that’s the big issue for you. Her arrogant demeanor. It’s something you’ve mentioned twice. The reason is clear. You’d rather talk about a facet of her demeanor, which isn’t actionable by the Ethics Committee, in order to distract the conversation from her apparent procurement of a job for her hubby, which is a matter actionable by the Ethics Committee. The distraction would spare the focus on Wagner’s actions during an election year and it would spare the focus on the GOP “good government ” types token response to her actions.
Why are you even bothering to argue this point, Smitty? It’s abundantly clear that Wagner should answer to the Ethics Committee.
Ask Bullock yourself. He’s your buddy. Dont worry the facts will be coming out. Probably you will figure some way to spin it like Bullock was in bed with Strine to cover for his secret agonzing journey to become a Democrat. What a crock.
BHB, you were marked as spam. Rectified.
“Probably you will figure some way to spin it….”
That sounds like the spin will be on the other side and you know know there is nothing to the allegation as will be seen when these so-called “facts” will come out.
But if you are so confident, bring out the facts now. What are you waiting for? Two weeks before the General Election, two weeks before the primary?
Going to do a Karl Rove trick, are you?
Let’s see what you have. If Bullock has done something illegal, I won’t support him.
Put up or shut up if you **really** have something.
“Some have suggested this organization (TURN) was really adapted by Bullock to put James Bonds to work for a no-show job for which Bonds collected a salary and Bullock shared.”
“Some have suggested….” That’s it? Suggestions? LOL.
The link to the review article only says this funding program exists. So what?
Your second link goes to a website but to no specific article about your allegation.
So you have “some have suggested” and two meaningless links.
If this is what Bullock has to worry about, well, he’ll sleep just fine at night.
I think Humbug saved me the trouble about some f the details. I dont understand how anyone could support Bullock unless they find out he did something “illegal”. Isn’t cozying up to Strine enough. Bullock had no problem using the same money Strine took from the mouths of trailer park residents! Shame!! He sleeps fine at night cause he is so sleazy.
“saying there really is no difference between Republicans and Democrats in Delaware indicating his switch should be a trivial act”
First of all, on a local level there is little difference between elected Dems & Repubs in DE. See the Delaware Incumbency Party.
On a national level and for federal office–which, it so happens, is the kind of office Bullock is running for–there is considerable difference in some important respects.
So how is what Bullock said wrong?
“Isn’t cozying up to Strine enough. Bullock had no problem using the same money Strine took from the mouths of trailer park residents!”
Are you saying the Strine was the sole source of this funding? Where’s your proof for this allegation? Is that why you are posting anonymously? To mix false & libelously allegations w/ benign facts?
Try to explain it away however makes you feel good. Bullock was in bed with Strine. Thats enough bad judgment for a lifetime. No way he gets my vote.
“Try to explain it away however makes you feel good. Bullock was in bed with Strine. ”
Oh, so that’s all there is to this so-called scandal? Bullock was an active member of the DE GOP and Strine is the DE GOP chairperson. Therefore, there is no daylight between Bullock & Strine.
Clearly, this is being done in the service of one of the other Dem primary contestants. The only other primary contestant whose supporters have been willing to peddle unsubstantiated sleaze in this race is so far is Karen Hartley Nagle.
Is that how the primary campaign will be run against Bullock? Half-truths, anonymous rumors and innuendo?
Please do “break” this so-called scandal. I’m looking forward it. I can’t wait to hang this political lynching of Chris Bullock on the primary candidate whose campaign intends to benefit from this probable “non-matter.”
Remember when Rev. Bullock was run out of Wilmington. I do. Leader of the church and married fathering children with members of his flock in the church. We have not forgotten or forgiven.
“Remember when Rev. Bullock was run out of Wilmington. I do. Leader of the church and married fathering children with members of his flock in the church. We have not forgotten or forgiven.”
Once more. Another anonymous rumor. No name to back up this potential libel.
I’ve vetted this matter by the way. There’s nothing to it. But bring it all out. Let the supporters of the Dem primary candidate peddling this tripe get it out in the open so we can all then see what s/he is really made of.
I don’t know Dana. Remember when could be a KHN proxy or Mike Castle proxy.
By the way “remember when” you’ll have a chance to caucus for you candidate of choice in the near future.
Christ, Garrett…or maybe I should remove the comma: Christ Garrett. Yes, that definitely sounds more accurate…our savior.
If you even think that I am some shill for Wagner, some apologist for her, then you again have proven your inability to push off trough and look at the whole perspective.
Unfortunately (did you read that word this time, or will you edit it out, too, for the sake of your argument becoming the loudest), due to crap policies, Wagner may not have to worry about answering to ethics on her husband. We all want her to answer (‘We’ meaning the blogosphere), but on what charges? Because she pissed us off? There are too many loopholes for her to use on this specific issue. That is the tangible problem. Close that opportunity down. You can theorize all you want that the action was vile, and I agree. As pissed off as we are (and you fifty times as pissed off, I guess, because that’s they way it is, hero), she’s got outs to play based on flimsy rules.
What Reeder is using is more than likely going to be the true, enforceable smoking gun. So, yes, Dana, bring her up and let her answer the accusations. Just don’t ignore that the rules around it are currently too weak and would amount to a walk when put up against a legal challenge. THAT is why I think what Bob Reeder said has much more merit.
Thanks for your time, hero.
“Mike Castle proxy”?
I suspect “remember when” is the same as “anonymous” above who made the comment about Strine. If so, it’s doubtful it’s a Castle proxy.
This is an old trick. The same 1 or 2 anonymous posters use multiple names to create the illusion of widespread support. It’s bullshit.
If you have access to the IP addresses, you could clear it up and tell us who, if anyone is, is postining under different monikers.
Hey, I can agree with Dana on that one…
This is an old trick. The same 1 or 2 anonymous posters use multiple names to create the illusion of widespread support. It’s bullshit.
I’ve seen enough of that crap in my day.
There is much that will come out about Rev. Bullock! The parishners know what happened at 8th street, what happened in Chicago and why he came back…lets just say, “in bed”!
Remember When may be a sockpuppet, but I have heard this same bit of gossip from other church-involved people I know in Wilmington. I certainly have no way to know if this is true or not, but this thing is certainly out there.
I am curious about this, however: I’ve vetted this matter by the way.
How, exactly, do you vet allegations of this scale?
“Christ, Garrett…or maybe I should remove the comma: Christ Garrett. Yes, that definitely sounds more accurate…our savior.”
Keep talking, Smitty. It won’t take long for most people to realize that even the most transparent and elementary forms of moral consistency must seem superhuman to you.
“There are too many loopholes for her to use on this specific issue. That is the tangible problem. ”
Oh, cut the crap. The letter which Burris SIGNED states, “This practice raises the appearance of an “…effort to realize personal financial gain
through public office…” as prohibited by Delaware Code (Title 29 Chapter 10 Section 1001). ”
Now why say that if there are all these loopholes?
If she might have violated this law, what more do you need as a basis for an ethics hearing? Yet the letter doesn’t call for an ethics hearing and Burris specifically said today that he wasn’t calling for one.
You are just covering for your own butt & Burris’. Nothing could be more clear.
Where was the rest of my comment, Christ Garrett? Didn’t suit you? She would be able to argue out of the problem with her husband easily. Yes, I want her to answer to it, but to lay all your chips on that hand, you stand to lose that hand of poker. I believe Reeder’s is the safer hand. BUT, like Reeder said, he included it at the end. In other words, here is my damning evidence (the Dover HS fiasco), but if you need more on the character, don’t overlook this (the hubby angle).
You won’t accept it, I am sure, but for the illustration of all others who actually attempt to understand full perspective, think of someone who is on trial for murder. The evidence suggests that person A did it. The evidence only hints, though, that person A premeditated the act. It is more overwhelming that it was a result of ignorance, greed, and not thinking of the consequence. The prosecution, however, is certain, despite how slim a chance, that they can convict on murder one. The shoot the moon…and lose. On murder one, the only charge brought by the prosecution, the defendant is NOT GUILTY. The defendant walks, yet the crime was still committed.
Reeder wants the smoking gun admitted. You want murder one. That’s my point.
Hero, I cover for no one. She obviously can’t help herself and that’s a problem.
Go ahead, cut-and-paste at your whim to make sure you shout the loudest. You’re the obsolute best at it, hero.
“I am curious about this, however: I’ve vetted this matter by the way.
How, exactly, do you vet allegations of this scale?”
There is no scale. How you do it is you talk to the people allegedly involved.
Just notice this, Cassandra. Notice that sources are anonymous and notice that it depends on the old racist stereotypes that most Black men father children out of wedlock, that they can’t restrain their sexual appetites.
I can’t wait for these rumors to come out “officially” to expose the racist tactics used by those supporting the primary candidate behind them.
For some strange reason Garrett sees a halo over the head of Pastor Bullock.
I find it interesting that Bullock announces his candidicy from the Pulpit in his church at the same time inviting a ranking member of Sen. Obama’s team to speak to the church attendees. This was reported in the News Journal on January 28, 2008 written by Robin Brown. It reads:
-WILMINGTON — Along with joyful
song, prayer and scripture, Sunday’s
service of Canaan Baptist Church had
politics on the program.
The pastor made it official that he is a
candidate for Delaware’s lone seat in
Congress — and got support from a
visiting leader of U.S. Sen. Barack
Obama’s presidential campaign.
At the same service, former
Pennsylvania senator and presidential
adviser Harris Wofford rose from the
pews to share his message with a
standing-room-only crowd of more
than 500 church members and guests.
The white-haired Wofford gave what he called “a rusty World
War II Army Air Corps salute” and said he was happy to join
them for worship after Obama won South Carolina’s Democratic
primary Saturday.
“They voted their hope and not their fear,” he said. “They voted
for the future and not the past.”
Bullock said hosting Wofford and letting him share Obama’s message also are appropriate
for the church — and his own candidacy. “He is in line with our vision and my mission of
faith, hope and love,” Bullock said.-
Well, well, well the Pastor did not find it appropriate to invite a member of Hillary’s team to address the audience? I wonder why that is? Pastor Bullock also saw nothing inappropriate with making his announcement from the Pulpit? Why should one think such things?
Well, it is really simple. It is called the LAW. In particular, IRS LAW. So, Garret is suggesting we send to Washington to become a LawMaker who can’t even figure out what the Law IS!
Read it for yourselves:
Charities May Not Engage in Political Campaign Activities
http://www.irs.gov/newsroom/article/0,,id=122887,00.html
IRS Releases New Guidance and Results of Political Intervention Examinations
http://www.irs.gov/newsroom/article/0,,id=154780,00.html
For the 2 aforementioned shennagins the Chuch’s 501(c)3 status may be placed in jeopardy and any income they receive would be taxed as “for-profit” income and subject the church to pay-up! Smart Bullock, let your ego dictate your course rather than your brains!
Smitty, you have really turned out to be such a disappointment.
Murder 1 and smoking guns? The analogy is pure smoke.
The matter is simple. If it appears she violated the law, then have the Ethics Committee investigate it. Call for the investigation. That’s not what you are willing to do.
But if Reeder’s 1st charge has so much weight, why didn’t Burris & the other letter signers call for an ethics com. investigation of it?
Why don’t you EXPLICITLY call for an investigation of it over at DelawarePoltics.Net?
Let me guess…it would hurt your chum if he allowed such a post on his blog?
Don’t kid yourself; Mike Castle isn’t going to bother to debunk either candidate. Until one of them shows an ability to raise some money, he’s in no danger.
“BaHumbug” writes: “I have recently met with Rev. Christopher Bullock and found him to be very arrogant and he didn’t have the time of day for me nor cared to listen to my issues nor did he have any grasp of issues in general. After researching the above, I guarantee I will not be voting for this slime.”
Uh-huh. You met with him. Sure you did. That’s why you won’t use your name? Because you feel so strongly about this? Whoever you’re working for is going to have to do a lot better than this; Delaware’s online politicking had advanced beyond this stage by 2004. If you don’t have enough guts to list your name after this horrible and horrifying experience, why should anyone care who you vote for? No guts, no credibility, my friend.
It’s just like the person who smeared John Still over his sex life. As best I can tell, I won that bet — the stuff never came out. If there’s real dirt floating around on Bullock, he’ll drop out on his own once he realizes it’s coming out. If not, well… let’s just say that whispers are one thing, evidence is another.
And that the Democrats, for all their supposed domination of Delaware, still don’t have anyone in lower office with the guts to challenge Mike Castle.
Christ Garrett, I pray that you some day get the point. As expected, you totally missed the point. You took murder one for the heinous crime that it is and totally missed the anaology on how going gung ho on a chance over something more certain can kick you in the ass on the back side (no pun intended).
Alas, what I guess I am fighting this whole time is YOU making it AGAIN about Burris. He should look into a restraining order against you, really.
Save us all, Christ Garrett!
FYI Garrett, I wish I could vote in the Primary against Bullock, but I cant because I am a Republican. If the Pastor had stayed with the GOP I would then have been able to vote against him! I hope he makes it to the General, he will be trounced and sent home.
Those links can be so instructive if you follow them. For example, “BahHumbug,” using the line of reasoning her TV co-host has been employing in stumping for KHN, holds aloft IRS law and waves it in the breeze.
Unfortunately for her argument, the second link “BahHumbug” lists includes this passage:
“Nearly three-quarters of 82 examinations completed to date have concluded that the tax-exempt organizations, including churches, engaged in some level of prohibited political activity. Most of these exams concerned one-time, isolated occurrences of prohibited campaign activity, which the IRS addressed through written advisories to the organizations.
“In three cases – involving tax-exempt organizations that were not churches – the prohibited activity was egregious enough to warrant the IRS proposing the revocation of the organizations’ tax-exempt status. ”
So there you have it: In the 2004 elections, out of all the complaints received, 82 were looked into. All but three were issued the equivalent of a warning.
Yeah, I’ll bet Chris Bullock is quaking in his boots. Wouldn’t your time be better spent trying to prove that KHN has actual supporters who are willing to spend actual money trying to get her elected?
There is nothing illegal about a pastor informing his church he is running for office.
There is nothing illegal about a candidate or a proxy to appear in a church and speak to a congregation.
Let me tell why this bit of misdirection is coming up now. Obama & Bullock are personal friends. They worked on joint projects in Chicago. So there’s an excellent chance Obama will come to Wilmington, put his arm around Chris Bullock and say “I support & trust this man. Vote for him.”
Obama who brought out a huge crowd to Rodney Square, that brought out Dem primary voters in numbers not seen in several years–endorsing Bullock.
The jealousy of at least one of his primary candidates must be enormous.
“He should look into a restraining order against you, really.”
See what I mean about these people. They can dish it out but can’t take it. Call them on their hypocrisy and they think it’s equivalent to a physical threat…as a potentially criminal.
Smitty, you are just another sleaze merchant.
I’ll be looking forward to your post on Dave’s blog calling for the ethic’s investigation of wagner….lol
Dana, you are a freak. How many different people have to tell you that? Will it ever sink in?
You’re gonna be the jerk that offs himself and makes it look like foul play, just to add to your cult of conspiracies.
Al, you opinion is absolutely worthless! If you havent researched the IRS rules, (which you obviously haven’t) keep thinkin your right. Do you think Castle doesnt no the rules Al Baby!
FYI: I am not Bahumbug! I post with my own name, so don’t try to blame me for comments by the many many people who reside in Wilmington, who know the truth and are talking all over town.
Bullock stated that “when he was a NACCP member in Chicago, he endorsed Obama”…FYI: the NAACP endorses NO CANDIDATE in any race….fabrications galore!
Obama was in Wilminton. Rev. Bullock was MIA.
The quote was taken directly from the link. The links go directly to the IRS rules you harp on all the time in your efforts to boost KHN.
“Al, you opinion is absolutely worthless.”
Sort of like your spelling and grammar?
By the way, if you’re going to personally insult me, Liz, why don’t you tell all the readers how you cry to my boss if I dare to respond to you?
And Liz, feel free to respond to the facts in my post any time. I won’t hold my breath.
Dana as you correctly reported…when Obama was in Wilmington, Rev, Bullock had every opportunity to appear with him on stage…Bullock was MIA! Obama could have at that moment, stated, “this is my friend and he has my support”…never happened! Could it be that Bullock and Obama are not as close as Richard Korn, and you would like voters to believe!. Rev had his chance to be seen, endorsed and supported…where was he that day. I did however see Karen Hartley Nagle standing in the front row right behind Obama who shook her hand after the event. Obama is running his own race. No congressional candidate with an opportunity to be seen with Obama and 20,000 people would have missed that opportunity, if they were really such “great friends”.
Al, you silly little man! I don’t call your show, I don’t respect you, and I still have all those vicious emails…you bet your sweet ass I called your boss…because you had to be reigned in. Now it appears you drag your rotten mouth baggage onto the blogs, wherever I post. Still no respect from me.
Do you think I am the only one who can find the IRS rules?
Wow! She shook hands with Obama! Let’s elect her!
Note: This is not an endorsement of Bullock. I just find this petty sniping at him a poor way to boost your own candidate. Sort of Hillary-esque, in fact.
Still no response to the facts. Any time, Liz. No rotten mouth, just the facts. Got any in response to my pointing out that only 3 groups — NONE OF THEM CHURCHES — were penalized for such violations in 2004? Anyone? Bueller?
Oh, and while we’re talking facts, you didn’t call my boss once — you call him nearly every day to complain about one thing or another. Facts.
Sorry Al but Bullock in bed with Terry Strine and a shady GOP slush fund that he used to pay his cronies is not petty. This is not ancient history it is as recently as early last year. When you add it to him being a fairweather Democrat and an opportunist it means a lot more. There will be more about this. Also Democrats in Delaware dont want to hear how we are no different than Repugs like Bullock said. Bullock may have Dana licking the palm of his hand but the rest of us see through this phony. Go back to Chicago and take Dana G with you!!
Yada, yada, yada. And yes it is petty. Nobody outside the party cares. And with all the turnout the gubernatorial primary will pull to the polls, a higher-than-usual proportion of primary voters will be normal people instead of the sort of party loyalists who care about such things.
But the basic problem for Bullock’s opponents is that, unless they raise some money, they won’t be able to get these smears out to a wider audience than the few thousand of us who frequent the blogs. That’s why they’re spinning it so furiously now — raising money is a lot harder than sliming people anonymously (give Liz credit — she signs her name).
Al: and just how much money has your boy Bullock raised! and Obamas not your boy either Al…your allegiances questionable.
Al, you really should get out more! Obviously you have no idea how many people from Wilmington who have close relationships with Rev are speaking about him. Its not all rumors when literally many people say the samething…are they all conspirators Al…just out to get him. I assure they are speaking out, and talking to each other comparing notes.
Your’e right about one thing…Castle isnt going to do anything until after the primary, when he knows who the opponent will be. I can assure the republicans have the documents have the information that will doom the Rev.
The people are speaking, speaking out and their first hand reports are believable….they would have no reason to say these things if they didn’t feel so strongly about them.
Dont worry Al the wider audience will hear it all. Cut the crap here. You are all about Bullock. He is acceptable to your very very very conventional wisdom. Your pal Dana G must have slipped you some koolaid.
Al, I don’t have to respond to you in any way, shape or form. I have the rules, I have regulations and you are dead wrong simple as it is…but please do continue your rant that I don’t have the facts…not only do I have the facts, but I understand someone has already reported those facts, someone who is not affiliated with Karen Hartley Nagle campaign, and who is not even a democrat. A good republican!
You are blinded by your allegiance to yourself, Christ Garrett.
Smitty, you are just another sleaze merchant.
Why, because I haven’t met your personal quota of worth, which is apparently measured in the number of vendettas executed?
I’ll be looking forward to your post on Dave’s blog calling for the ethic’s investigation of wagner….lol
My blog, too, hero. Why should I retread what you have already covered, ad nauseum? Additionally, why should I do any damn thing that you tell me to? Are you the barometer for all that is moral in Delaware?! I recently vented frustration on the triad alliance for Delarvae, but I don’t say that for an “atta boy.” I say it so you can give me a tick mark in that scorecard that you apparently keep.
I guess that makes the score 1-Smitty, 0-Burris, 9,999,999,999 – Christ Garrett for popular opinion of the day. Only 9,999,999,998 to go for me! Let me get started!
I didnt get a chance to read all the BS on this thread. I should get to that later. But, for now I want to remind EVERYONE Karen has in the past and currently holds the position that personal attacks against Reverend Bullock are out of line. These attacks are rejected and denounced by Karen and she wants it to stop. And for the people who are suggesting Karen is behind it, their allegations are just as bad as the personal attacks you say you condemn!
I dont know who is behind it but I personally would like to see it stopped as well. So, stop blaming someone who you have no proof to make such false allegations.
Mike,
For what it is worth I don’t associate Karen with any of this crap. She seems committed to running a clean campaign from what I’ve seen.
to al: #77….an out and out lie! your truly discrediting yourself. I have every email to WDEL re: you….and their responses…its an absolute lie you “say I call every day to complain” pettiness, and bald faced lies = no respect for you.
and to prove my point, I intend you email your bosses as soon as I am done here and ask them if they “told you I contact them on a daily basis” too pathetic for words. I don’t listen to you, dont want to engage you, or respond to you, I realize you are out of control…fixated is the word I am looking for.
Bullock and Obama are friends? LOL. Get real. BTW: Is that the same kind of crap as Bullock telling people at Democratic RD meetings he’s got a bunch of doctorate’s? Let’s see them! maybe he got online degrees while he was hiding out in Chicago. Then he moved back and switched party’s. Nothin but a lying opportunist.
Al Mascitti would be interested to know I met Dr. Bullock in his church office to discuss politics! Do you suppose using Church property to discuss his political campaign is a no-no according to IRS regulations? You’re damn right it is in violation! Now, go back to the IRS regulations again and read-between-the-lines like you did before and come back here and tell me this is ok too! Or, perhaps the good Reverend would be truthful and tell you this is what he has been doing himself! Keep the faith Mascitti!
“By the way, if you’re going to personally insult me, Liz, why don’t you tell all the readers how you cry to my boss if I dare to respond to you?”
Well, well, well…has Liz Allen been trying to censor free speech on the blogosphere by running to people’s bosses when she doesn’t like what they say.
Busted!
“For what it is worth I don’t associate Karen with any of this crap. She seems committed to running a clean campaign from what I’ve seen.”
Yes, it’s her supporters I suspect. I happen to know at least one of them makes up bald-faced lies about people to create smears. I know it for a fact.
“Is that the same kind of crap as Bullock telling people at Democratic RD meetings he’s got a bunch of doctorate’s?”
Bring on your proof anonymous scumbag. If he doesn’t have a D0ctorate, then prove it. If he has lied about it, then prove it.
But you can’t.
“Al Mascitti would be interested to know I met Dr. Bullock in his church office to discuss politics! Do you suppose using Church property to discuss his political campaign is a no-no according to IRS regulations? You’re damn right it is in violation!”
Then turn him in. Contact a Federal attorney. Put up or shut up.
But you won’t turn him in because it never happened.
Oh Dana, care to say “who the supporter is that makes up LIES”? Anything I have said, I can back up!
If you have facts, bring em on! We would all like to hear them. Again, I am not BahHumbug!
Clarification there Dana…I did as I said, and emailed Booker and Reith. Booker responded that he would post on this blog that I have contacted him by email 7 times in 2008! Hardly daily as your boy Al claims…you misstate facts about me…and I will get to the bottom of it…now lets see if Booker posts what he says. I have the email and sent it to others as proof!
Just like I predicted: Smitty will do nothing.
It is well known that you can’t go after an elected GOPer in DE and have any political future as a future candidate unless you get approval from Lancaster Ave.
That’s the real story behind all of Smitty’s BS. That’s why a call for an Ethic’s hearing won’t appear on Dave ‘s blog.
Hey, Smitty, you want to e-mail me a call for an Ethics Hearing under your name? I’ll put it on my blog.
Bet you won’t do that either.
No Dana I am not about censorship. If you and your pal Al, want to continue the “hate Liz Allen campaign, and blame every blog here that speaks about Bullock as anon! It would appear you are tryin to end free speech!
The issue with Al has nothing to do with this…it has to do with Al and his vicious ugly emails…you two keep on with your smear campaign and I will post all those emails…then we will see who is “stalking” who?
“Oh Dana, care to say “who the supporter is that makes up LIES”? Anything I have said, I can back up!
If you have facts, bring em on! We would all like to hear them.”
Interesting, Liz, that you think you’re the liar I was referring to. Little Freudian slip there?
“Hardly daily as your boy Al claims”
It’s like you to make a big deal about a hyperbolic statement to evade the real issue.
So let me ask you about the real issue: Did you complain to Al’s bosses about his web comments on DE blogs?
Yes or no.
Oh and Dana, continue on with your conversation at #91. Smear campaign. Another figment of your imagination…throw crap against the wall and see what sticks. On that issue I think Celia Cohen was the smearor!
“t has to do with Al and his vicious ugly emails”
Why is Al’s e-mail to you a matter for his bosses? Did he use a WDEL e-mail address?
Or did you blast him in e-mails as you often do to people, only to get slapped back by him and you couldn’t take what you dished out?
So you thought you would get back at him by telling his bosses about an e-mail conversation? And you don’t call that censorship?
Dana: It is obvious to me that you meant me! You and your boy Al, have tried to pin all these statements made by others on me…your wrong dead wrong, and I will call you on each one. I post under my name….and I stand by what I say…
Oh yes he did…in fact he posted on one while at WDEL Dana.in the middle of his show…you need to get your facts straight…I have every one of the emails…you will not paint me as the smearor…I will challenge you right back…you should know that by now…
Dana: get your facts straight! Your emotions are overiding your judgement.
And for clarification: the debate Al and I had was over the vote count in NH, and his demonizing people on the air, like me and Cindy…thats what started it… his attacks went on until 12:30 at night and continued the following morning. You need to stop talking about what you were not priveleged to know, but again throwing crap against the wall.
Censorship! It was Al Masscitti who censored me…telling me never to call his show again! I never have…so don’t even begin to talk about censorship..it was I who was censored!
“It is obvious to me that you meant me! You and your boy Al, have tried to pin all these statements made by others on me…”
Paranoia.
“I will challenge you right back…you should know that by now…”
Oh, I know it. But you are as challenging as a gnat so it doesn’t bother me one bit.
“It was Al Masscitti who censored me…telling me never to call his show again! ”
If you called his bosses about that reason, then I can understand. But you say you called his bosses about private e-mail he sent to you. And you tried to get him in trouble for that…possibly resulting in him getting fired and losing his income because he blistered your butt in an e-mail. Something private and not public.
You can’t stand on principle about this, Liz. You could have cost a person his job because your ego was hurt. That’s lower than low. That’s petty & disgusting.
ChristDana, you still blabbering on?
I’m not your dog, as much as you might make me try to be. It’s obvious your barometer of a good blogger is how many people he/she can take down in the name of your righteousness. If someone dare transgress, then all indignation shall fall down on them like embers from the sky and burn their sinful soul! ChristDana will curse you to hell!!!
All I freaking said is that the tact Bob Reeder is taking is the most effective one, or at least that is the point I have been belaboring on your closed mind. I never said she was not wrong. Now, before you tell the world what a sinful person I am in your world of self-righteousness, I obviously used more words than that, because it takes that many plus some to make you see a point. Whenever I get to that point of your lightbulb illuminating, then I will let the world know. For at last, we can establish a par level of expectation.
In the meantime, hallelujah! ChristDana is saving the world from evildoer bloggers like me!
Dana: you are behaving like a blithering idiot!
But Al Mascitti going on the blogs and “stalking” me with comments is okay by you. Dana, you and Al, in my opin are like two peas in a pod!
Whatever, Smitty.
I now consider you to be just another troll spewing bullshit who uses his real name.
I no longer care what you think.
Oh, Liz, you were being “stalked” on the blogosphere? LOL.
Perhaps you should have called the police instead of his bosses.
Oh, that’s right. The police would have laughed in your face. It’s better to try to get him in trouble w/ his employer to censor him.
Bahhumbug, Item 60! Very interesting!
Garrett wrote: “But you won’t turn him in because it never happened.”
Poor Poor Mr. Garrett. It never happened because the clairvoyant Mr. Garrett says so. Why not just ask your chum if this is so and if he is truthful you may find out this is the case! Your defense of Bullock is laughable. In fact, you are the moron who responded to Liz with her mentioning apparently as an afterthought that Bullock believes in the RepubliCrat system in Delaware that there is no difference between the Democrats and Republicans. Frankly, it appears Liz was in agreement with Bullock. Then you went on to have her prove her false claim that Bullock said there is no difference between the Democrats and the Republicans. That’s when you opened the door. Your man Bullock was on TV saying just that on channel 28 and then bashing the Republicans to boot! Hey, if Bullock wants to switch partys that’s fine but to burn bridges when leaving by bashing the Republican Party is a big mistake. If you missed the Korn show on 28 you should get a copy and take a look. If Bullock has some graduate degrees it certainly doesn’t speak well for him to be bashing the Republicans when justifying his turncoat switch to the Democrats.
May your clairvoyance show you the way.
Oh and something else, I am not Liz Allen. I am a Republican male who has resided in this State for the past 24 years. I have admired Liz for her advocacy work for many years and only jumped into this thread because the lunitic Garrett said prove it that Bullock said there is no difference between the Republicans and Democrats. Moreover, Liz doesnt know who I am!
I have no comment
ChristGarrett, you stopped caring what I think when I went against you. Feh.
@ Liz: Fact: Of all the complaints about politics in churches during the 2004 campaign, NONE resulted in a church having its tax-exempt status revoked. It’s right in the link Bah Humbug supplied. Any response? Or don’t you understand the question?
I’ve been commenting on these blogs since long before you discovered them. What you don’t realize, apparently, is that people answering and challenging each other is what they’re all about. You don’t seem to enjoy that. Whatever. All I know is that when you were given the slightest taste of your own treatment, you ran crying for Daddy, in the form of my boss, threatening to sue me for harassment. And don’t worry, Liz, everyone at the station knows exactly how often you call and email. Facts, Liz.
As for Bullock, I don’t know the guy, don’t support him and don’t much care if you all expose whatever it is he’s accused of. I just know an astroturfing campaign — in this case for KHN — when I see one. But you timid little sleaze merchants go ahead. Anonymice on blogs are much, much cheaper than a dime a dozen.
Al, you may have been posting here long before a lot of people, but I say with a bit of pride that I figured it out before you: don’t respond to whackos.
As you can see by my fall from grace, dis, it appears to be an affliction…or in my case, one of several plagues. We can’t help but to respond. Cure me.
Smitty, there is an article on the Vatican today that says three more sins have been added to the ‘seven deadly’. They missed one: “Thou shalt ignore that which is pointless and irritates one’s nether regions.”
So, you’re saying it’s akin to that awful, itchy rash Jason keeps complaining about in his pants?
Interesting, never thought about it that way. You can look, but better not touch! Danger! Danger!
That’s weird. Sen. McDowell has the same rash!!!!!
Somebody’s been double-dipping in the guacamole!!!
Weak. Now you are just phoning it in.
Agreed. Mine was funnier. You weren’t here for the Frightland days. I will be glad to train you, though.
Dis: I try not to feed trolls, and I wouldn’t respond to Liz, except that she has made herself a nuisance to WDEL from a date far preceding my employment at the station.
Al: if you had a thread of decency you would state the facts. You damn right I contacted the station about the “right wing whackos” WDEL had on since 2000 run up to the Iraq War. Rick Jenson, then Rush then Hannity, 24/7 right wing. Yes I complained along with many others in fact there was a Fairness in Media meeting of about 20 people trying to figure out what to do.
Our complaints to WDEL got Gerry Fulcher on the air to go against Rick…until Dana went to the management of WDEL and told them a bunch of unfounded allegations against Gerry! Which got him fired!
Pete Booker emailed me yesterday that in fact I had contacted the station 7 times since January, and then at midnight last night sends another email counting all the articles on world events that I had sent to the station….a bunch of men who are turning into mice!
Pathetic attempts to cover their misguided unfair practice of “limiting calls to the station by everyone”, and silencing anyone who brings another perspective to the stations one sided views.
Look at this way Al, if we (and I say we) because I know several others who have vehemently complained over the years…Rick would still be on alone in the am..and you wouldnt have a job there!
And there you have it, folks. Liz Allen thinks she runs WDEL.
She actually has no knowledge of the workings of the station, why anyone was hired or fired, or what effect she has had on programming. Those are her “facts.”
And, of course, she still hasn’t formulated a response to the fact that a) complaints about politicking by churches rarely result in action and b) her favorite candidate for U.S. Congress has no bona fide qualifications for the job other than the ones stated in law, basically that she’s old enough and has met the residency requirements to run. Just like about a half-million others in Delaware.
Al, so your saying it doesn’t matter IF Bullock is breaking campaign law, its politically Ok, because he is NOT likely to be prosecuted for it…gee thanks Good Government Masscitti.
nice to see the only research you have done was done by Bahumbug…keep thinking that is all there is to that issue.
You’re the one who threatened Bullock’s flock about losing their tax deductions. Seems to me you’re the one who needs to back up that assertion. And the facts leave you high and dry — there’s not much chance they’ll lose anything.
I don’t blame you for resorting to personal attacks and vague threats. It’s really all you’ve got.
Al,bend over and touch your knees! I threatened no one! I stated that “others had the information, and would use it…the republicans fool! Refer back to Bahumbug! Also, I stated on the blogs (after I did the research the information so the churchpeople wouldnt get into trouble, for an issue they probably know nothing about…oh forgive me Al for looking out for the church folk.
Yes, I have heard all over town from a variety of people what their stating….which is why I started doing a little research on the matter.
FYI Al, my research goes back to 1982….but of course you havent done any so you continue to speak with half a deck!
FYI: I am not part of Karen Hartley Nagles campaign. I do a show with her once a month, I am supporting her, because I know this: she is honest, informed, researched, smart, and has as much or more “good works in the community” as your guy does. She will do very well with her campaign against Castle.
The voters will speak Al, not you, not me, not Dana.
Let the process go forward, but that doesnt mean that those who have information have no right to bring it out….thats what a primary is all about.
Your attempts to place your undeniable hatred and fixation against me, onto Karen Hartley Nagle is absolutely questionable Al. Stop attacking Karen to attack me.
Richard Korn brought the free oil to Delaware for which I highly commend for and give him credit. So why is that listed on Bullocks campaign?
I don’t know Bullock and don’t support him. (He’s not my “boy,” a rather loaded word you ought to reconsider using about a black man.) There is nothing to show in any way that I care whether or not he gets this nomination. I guess the Democrats are running out of time to push someone serious, so they might settle on Bullock. I wouldn’t count on them giving him much money, though.
I don’t care enough about you to hate you, so I guess it’s not “undeniable” after all. As I said in the emails you seem so fond of, you’re a sad woman with a lot of problems. If you take that as “vicious,” or even insulting, well, then, we all know where you’re coming from.
You also apparently lack the facts or persuasiveness to make any reasonable case for why your co-host is a viable, legitimate candidate for Congress. If you choose not to do so, I’ll understand. There really isn’t much case to make. She’s a nice lady. She means well. That doesn’t mean anyone has to take her seriously, and if she doesn’t raise any money — six figures, minimum — nobody will. That’s just the way the political world works, Liz. Wishing it were different — or hollering about it and using! exclamation! points! after! every! sentence! — doesn’t really get it done. After 25 years, I would have thought you had figured that out by now.
Why dont you two go get a Ring. Like in the WBA!
Disappointed: Why don’t you make up yet another name?
Everybody else:
Just to illustrate the Liz Allen method, here’s her latest missive to my boss (actually, my boss’s boss’s boss) from yesterday:
–Today, on the Delaware Liberal blog…Al Mascitti at comment #77, states that I am calling you on a daily basis to complain? I had asked you a few months ago, to speak with Al, who claimed that “he would follow me on the blogs….(like a stalker). For awhile he didnt engage but here he is again today making comments that are not true. I ask that you respond as to “whether Liz Allen calls you on a daily basis to complain’. a yes or no response required. ”
See how specific Liz is when she wants something her way? The hyperbolic statement “every day” is taken literally. If only she could answer critics with such specificity. Meanwhile, the substance of my statements is ignored in favor of Clintonesque behind-the-scenes efforts to shut me up. It’s the same crap the Gordonberry gang tried when I was at the News Journal .
The other amazing part is that Liz thought that my responding to her screeds on blogs amounted to “stalking” her. She can’t respond to criticism, so she tries to shut it off.
Liz, you’re going to have to come up with some new skills to survive in the blogosphere. You run to my boss to complain that I’m responding to you on open public forums? What’s that amount to, intellectual stalking? Try actually reading what other people write and coming up with thought-out responses, instead of insulting the intelligence, research and motives of everyone who disagrees with you.
Notice how nobody engages you when you flog the single-payer health care bill? There’s a reason for that. If you think about it, maybe you’ll figure out what it is.
Al, Al, Al, what’s the matter with you? What is your problem? I think I have the answer to both questions. You are running interference for Garrett who is running interference for Bullock. Plus, I would like to add that I like your show…I mean really! But, on this blog you are a moron! And guess what? I’m even going to tell you why you’re a moron. Or, maybe I should say, maybe you think everybody else is a moron and can’t read.
You mentioned above somewhere: “Unfortunately for her argument, the second link “BahHumbug” lists includes this passage:..”.
Well, Al, you totally ignore the first link. And you totally ignore in the second link the fact the deficiencies of the Churches were one-time-deals.
So who are you kidding? Bullock has 3 strikes in my book so far on the Church matter. You can dance and deflect and contort your supposed ‘facts’ but anyone who can read knows the truth regarding violations of IRS regulations.
Oh, and something else, Bullock is no Obama. Republicans and Independents can get behind a guy like Obama. Bullock is just an opportunist who thinks nothing of burning bridges with his former Party and then trashing them. This coming after doing the same thing to the Democrats in the early to mid-2000’s. By the way, these are facts Jack!
There was another article that I cannot find anymore where Bullock could not make up his mind about Ashcroft. He danced and tried to placate the Republicans while also trying to not piss-off liberals who despised Ashcroft.
In summary, Al, with all of your non-sense diatribe, I’ve decided to take my business and listenership to WILM 1450 on the AM dial. I need to catch up on my Rush in the afternoon and Watson in the morning. Moreover, you may want to let whoever the boss is at WDEL, with the radio station portraying itself as the only live traffic reports in the State, this is false! WILM has live traffic too!
Keep the faith Mascitti!
Al, I really have come to the conclusion you don’t like women. As far as your “stalking me on the blogs”, that is what you stated on another blog some time ago.. I will follow you on every blog! Fixated Masscitti. You even “blog” when at work, your so obsessive.
And everyone should know that Pete Booker did respond as to “my contacting the station every day” as you so exaggerated. He emailed back that I had emailed 7 times in 2008. Then at midnight emailed again to say that I had emailed 25 times in 2008…yeah if you count all the emails I sent from press articles on world events.Nice to hear that WDEL keeps emails of the citizens ,..hows that for Big Brother!
I do not wish to engage you on any level. Your filthy remark “re Nancy Willing having McDowells penis in her mouth” was an insult to all women, and way out of line.
I have never given your/mine email exchange to anyone including your bosses.
I am a private citizen. I am not a “talk show host representing a radio station, you are. Therefore your attacks whether against me, Mike Protack or anyone else you choose to target does not go unnoticed.
You want to avoid Bullocks problems because you have no “facts”, others do and they are talking. I got a call the other day telling me stuff that made my ears red, if there is any proof to those allegations (and they were from a republican) who thought I was involved in Karen Hartley-Nagles campaign. I informed him I was not, and that she would never listen to the rumors and would not investigate whether true or not. She is running her campaign on the issues she believes Delawarean’s who contact her campaign want answered.
Oh and for your information on the single payer health care issue…rally tomorrow at Leg Hall, another issue you refused to deal with. FYI: AFL-CIO, Acorn, APRI, Green Party, IPOD, Retired Police/Firefighters and many other groups while be represented. Dr. McDowell and I were on Brittingham’s WILM show last Sunday night, and were invited to come back on again this Sunday night. On In Depth Delaware this Sunday we will be hosting three of four candidates for Insurance Commissioner.
I do not wish to engage with you Al on any level, anymore., not on the blogs nowhere, you don’t respond to me and I wont respond to you, deal…ta ta.
Sorry, Liz, you don’t get to dictate terms of my posting in a public forum. I’ll respond whenever I think it’s necessary to correct your mistakes. Your refusal to respond to factual arguments shows exactly how weak you are.
BahHumbug: Oh, I’m so upset! You’ll never listen again! Boo hoo hoo! Please.