Wednesday Open Thread

Filed in National by on May 26, 2010

Welcome to the Wednesday edition of your open thread. A hot & humid Wednesday. It certainly feels like summer today anyway. So, is there something on your mind you want to share? Put it here in the open thread.

RNC “Young Gun” and so-called “Worst Candidate Ever” Vaughn Walker lost the Republican primary for the ID-01 seat yesterday.

Idaho state Rep. Raul Labrador won the Republican nomination Tuesday in the state’s nationally targeted 1st Congressional District, pulling an upset over rival Vaughn Ward.

Labrador won the race despite a significant fundraising disadvantage and a campaign endorsement for Ward by former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin. Labrador’s victory sets up a battle with first-term Democrat Walt Minnick in November.

So why was Vaughn Walker called the worst candidate ever?

Meet Vaughn Ward. He’s running in today’s Republican primary in Idaho’s 1st Congressional District. He’s an Iraq War veteran. A former CIA operations officer. A fourth-generation Idaho native. Heck, Sarah Palin supports him.

And after this spring’s disastrous, gaffe-filled primary campaign — during which Ward declared that Puerto Rico was a country, apparently plagiarized fellow candidates and Barack Obama, campaigned on cutting federal spending while his wife’s gig at Fannie Mae allowed Ward to go without an income, and re-released a six-month-old endorsement — Ward may be able to add another title to his resume: Worst candidate ever.

I’m sure Walt Minnick is sad he can’t run against the “worst candidate ever.” Ward was supposed to be the sane candidate.

The ongoing Nikki Haley story continues. The blogger who alleges he had an affair with Haley released some text messages that show the Haley campaign trying to contain the story.

The texts, posted on Folks site, FITSNews, are dated about 10 days ago and consist of discussions about various reporters working on a story that involves Haley and Folks, and how to kill the story. In one May 15 text, Haley campaign manager Tim Pearson tells Folks “I’m telling you man, we keep this under wraps and nh is going to win.”

Just one of the texts, purportedly sent from GOP operative Wes Donehue to Folks on May 14, actually describes the topic of the story being discussed: “Now, I don’t give a fuck of you believe me or not. Your the one who screwed her. You’re the one who bragged about it. She’s the one who told BJ. Yall point fingers at your own damn selves and leave me the fuck out of it.”

According to Folks, “BJ” is B.J. Boling, a staffer for Haley opponent Rep. Gresham Barrett (R-SC).

I hate to say I told you so, but I did say that the blogger (Folks) was likely to see Haley’s denial as an attack and respond accordingly. I’m sure Haley’s campaign is hoping to string out the denials until after the primary on June 8. So far I think her unequivocal denial probably worked but that can only go so far if the other party has proof. Pass the popcorn is what I say.

Tags:

About the Author ()

Opinionated chemist, troublemaker, blogger on national and Delaware politics.

Comments (27)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

  1. anonone says:

    I am glad to see that you continue to find the sexual affairs of republickins so compelling while ignoring the fact that the Obomba administration is using the solicitor general to lobby for immunity to the pedophiles in the Vatican and deny the victims of their abuse their day in court.

    Meanwhile, the Obomba Justice Department has decided that it is important to prosecute unemployed people for sending “harrassing” e-mails to Senators.

    Institutionalized pedophilia = Immunity from prosecution
    E-mail to senators = Federal prosecution

    Nothing to see here…move along…

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/05/25/bruce-shore-unemployed-ph_n_588798.html

  2. Delaware Dem says:

    Liberal Geek’s Respose to Anobombaone:

    You are a deranged zealot because you mischaracterized the article that you posted so that you could lead people to think that Obama was supporting immunity to pedophiles. From your article:

    The solicitor general’s office, which defends the position of President Barack Obama’s administration before the Supreme Court, said the Ninth Circuit improperly found the case to be an exception to the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act, a 1976 federal law that sets limits on when other countries can face lawsuits in US courts.

    That is their position. It is a question of whether the Vatican is sovereign, and thus able to be sued in US courts, not whether they are culpable.

    Your argument is getting even more specious, since you are now saying that Obama is seeking immunity for child molesters because he doesn’t disregard the legal status of another nation.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legal_status_of_the_Holy_See

    You may argue with the legal status of the Vatican, but that argument does not lead directly to the binary support of molesters or victims.

    In short, bullshit.

    And I will add, so long as you refer to Obama as “Obomba,” I immediately do not pay attention to you.

  3. liberalgeek says:

    For the record, that was not directed at me, it is quoting me. Figures that I get quoted as soon as I curse. Perfect.

  4. nemski says:

    Who is this A1 you talk about?

  5. Delaware Dem says:

    Yes, I should have more clear there, Geek. Thank you. And cursing is a prerequisite for me quoting you.

  6. P.Schwartz says:

    racist obama sending 1200 troops to Arizona to racially profile poor honest hardworking brown migrants trying to get to work…

    Just Like Bush

  7. anon says:

    obama sending 1200 troops to Arizona

    I have to admit, it is a little bit as if Ike had sent troops to Little Rock to enforce segregation.

    I’d rather see the troops go to Arizona to enforce the Constitution.

  8. P.Schwartz says:

    Barney Frank wants to see Rep. Djou’s birth certificate

    The Hill ^ | MAY 26, 2010 | Bob Cusack
    Tongue firmly in cheek, Rep. Barney Frank (D-Mass.) on Tuesday afternoon called on reporters to demand to see the birth certificate of new Rep. Charles Djou (R-Hawaii). As Djou (pictured here) was being sworn into office, Frank walked the hallway of the Speaker’s Lobby off the House floor calling on the media to “do your job” and review Djou’s papers. It was a small bit of payback for the enormous amount of attention some conservatives (and the media) paid to the is-the-president-really-from-America controversy.

    thanks for the reminder, Bwany.

  9. anonone says:

    Around here it is too much to expect that the Federal Government should take the side of molested American children over the interests of their Vatican molesters. It would be far better if the administration challenged the Vatican’s claim of sovereignty.

    By the way, the Ninth Circuit court of Appeals already allowed the lawsuit against the Vatican that the administration is fighting against. The court “found the case to be an exception to the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act.”

    That people here would argue, for whatever reason, that the Federal Government should actively be seeking to deny these citizens their day in court by giving sovereign immunity to their molesters is beyond the pale. It is the moral equivalent of granting immunity to thousands of Dr. Bradleys

    So now we can add “pedophilia” to “torture,” “domestic spying,” and “civil rights violations” as crimes the Obomba administrations thinks those in power should be immune from being prosecuted for.

    But sending complaining e-mails to a Senator is now a Federal Offense.

  10. Geezer says:

    Who is denying them their day in court? They’re being denied the opportunity to drag the Pope out of the Vatican, not their day in court.

    Maybe the unicorns can bring the Pope in on a magic rainbow. Or maybe you could get off your hysterical high horse once in a while.

  11. Delaware Dem says:

    Anonone is an insane Purist. If President Obama sneezed, Anonone would say Obama is pro-common cold.

  12. donviti says:

    nothing like Obama caving once again to the right and supporting a police state. Can’t wait till he sends more troops to Afghanistan, stays in Iraq and takes away my Miranda rights.

    oh wait….

  13. ACORN video faker O’Keefe pleads guilty but avoids jail.

    Conservative filmmaker James O’Keefe and three compatriots today pleaded guilty to entering real property belonging to the United States under false pretenses for the January incident in which they entered Sen. Mary Landrieu’s New Orleans office and claimed to be from the telephone company, the Times-Picayune reports.

    O’Keefe was sentenced to three years of probation, a fine of $1,500 and 100 hours of community service. The others — Stan Dai, Joseph Basel, and Robert Flanagan — got the same fine, two years of probation, and 75 hours of community service.

  14. anonone says:

    Delaware Dem,

    I am sorry for you that find the word “Obomba” so offensive to you. Since any criticism of the escalating war in Afghanistan has largely disappeared from the posts of Delaware Liberal, using the politically satirical spelling of the President’s name is simply my way of reminding people that this President is still waging a war in Afghanistan in support of a corrupt leader who has threatened to join the Taliban and without any clear national interest. Not to mention Gitmo is still open and he is still planning to leave 50,000 troops in Iraq.

    The fact that the bloggers here are so politically sensitive to criticisms of “Obomba” is truly and sincerely surprising to me considering how relentless they were about criticizing Bush and the republickins. (One even wishing that they would be lined up and…well, you know). The fact is that you (collectively) generally ignore virtually any negative news about Obomba that you would have talked about for days if it were Bush doing the same things. I guarantee you that if Bush had the exact same response to the BP gusher that this administration has had, he would (rightly) be being excoriated daily on these pages. But because it is Obama? Only tepid criticism, if that.

    I don’t violate any of the DL “rules” so I have to ask: Is the strength of liberalism so shallow at DL that you (collectively) need to threaten to ban me for posting criticisms of “Obomba?” Is the word “Obomba” so obscene that you (collectively) feel the need to modify my posts, as cassandra_m did?

    I cannot control how people are going to react to my comments, but I have a point of view that I express as does every one else who posts here.

  15. Delaware Dem says:

    No, what is offensive to me is that I, and everyone, have to agree with you in order to be considered good liberals in your eyes. Indeed, President Obama must do everything you want him to do when you want him to do it in order for you to have any kind words for him rather than fiery denunciations at every turn.

    I am not a Purist. You are.

    You are free to voice your opinions. You are not free to make us agree with you.

  16. anonone says:

    Geezer, the administration is fighting to stop the lawsuit, i.e. deny them their day in court. Ninth Circuit court of Appeals already allowed the lawsuit, so the administration is trying to stop it.

    I know that you’re smarter than that, but I guess the unicorn argument is all you got.

    BTW, I ride a high unicorn, not a high horse.

  17. anonone says:

    Del Dem,

    Let’s look at some of the “turns” that I have “fiery denunciations” for: Lying. Torture. Secret prisons. Secret detentions. Denial of Constitutional rights. Escalating war. Gitmo. HCR that isn’t HCR. Failure to prosecute war crimes. Off-shore drilling. Immunity for telecoms. Absence of leadership at key times. Failure to nominate judges. Deference to corporate interests over citizens’ interests. Failing to manage the BP oil spill. Taking sides in the PA Senate primary. And now siding with the Vatican over molested American children.

    Which ones don’t you think justify “fiery denunciations?” I am quite confident that anyone of those issues would have led to plenty of “fiery denunciations” here if the president were currently a republican (except “Taking sides in the PA Senate primary”).

    It has nothing to do with being a “purist” or a “good liberal” or a “bad liberal;” it has everything to do with being consistent in my own evaluation of the person in the office, regardless of political party.

  18. MJ says:

    A1 – Comrade in Chief. Nothing is good enough for him. If he said the sky was green and we agreed with him, he’d call us out and say that we didn’t agree that the sky was green enough. He’s a phony, plain and simple. I guess I’m going to have to unleash another wave of flying monkeys on his ass.

  19. anonone says:

    Actually, MJ, about a year ago, I agreed with and got along with almost everybody here. Sure, we had some disagreements, but in general, our relationships were good. Now, because I criticize Obomba for the exact things I criticized Bush for, I am the enemy. And, like your comment, many responses to my comments are just dumb personal attacks that have nothing to do with anything substantive.

    So I guess that I just have to believe that your comment represent the pinnacle of your ability to defend the policies and practices of this president.

    And, my unicorns will defeat your flying monkeys.

  20. pandora says:

    Actually, A1, I took issue with your tone and approach long before you criticized Obama. I did it here, and at DWA. Just sayin’

  21. anonone says:

    Sure, pandora, I remember that. Our styles are quite different, and I have complemented you on yours. But it isn’t mine (obviously). Still, I never felt like if we ever met at a DL gathering that it would be anything other than friendly. Maybe I was wrong.

    Back then, it never degraded into the situation that we have today. Nobody was threatening to ban me and no one was modifying my comments.

  22. delacrat says:

    “He may be an S.O.B., but he’s our S.O.B.”

    -Franklin Roosevelt

    What FDR felt about the Nicaraguan dictator, Anastasio Somoza, describes the view of Obomba that prevails here on DL. (And that’s bad.)

  23. P.Schwartz says:

    Solar Plant Workers Told To Stay Home Without Pay Due To Obama Visit

    KRON: Construction workers at the Solyndra Plant in Fremont will be spending the day at home Wednesday without pay as President Obama visits the company to praise its work on solar panels.

    Union workers have been told not to come back until Thursday because of security concerns associated with the President’s visit. Workers tell KRON 4’s Kate Thompson this day off means they won’t get paid.

    oh the irony…

  24. itsallacomedy says:

    Even though I supported and voted for Obama, I can not and will not go along to get along. This guy has been a huge disappointment. Sending 12,000 troops to the border? Pure idiocy. Bush sent 6000 and they stood around, got in the way and did nothing. Those 12,000 troops should have been to the Gulf to clean up, along with the Army Corp of Engineers and every other government agency BEFORE this became the disaster it is. It was Obama who lifted the drilling ban, it was Obama’s administration who have given 27 more off shore drilling licenses, while the horror in the gulf is happening. It is Obama spending a trillion in Afganistan! Its Obama who permitted Gen. Petraeus to issue his secret orders to expand the military into many other countries. Petraues should have been fired long ago! Does Obama have the cahones to deal with this problems, obviously passing the buck is good democratic politics according to liberals who back him on everything as wrong as he may be.

  25. Not Jason330 says:

    Where is the podcast?

  26. Geezer says:

    I agree, he’s been a huge disappointment.

    A1, if the plaintiffs left the Pope out of it, they would get their day in court, just like victims in dozens of other jurisdictions, including this one, already have.

    And haven’t you already admitted you’re the one with the unicorns?

    By the way, I only rarely take you to task for criticizing Obama, and only on those issues on which I think it’s a rainbow too far to blame it on him. I am right there with you on the war, financial “reform,” Gitmo and torture and all the other Constitutional violations. I disagree with you on HCR only because I reluctantly decided, after much deliberation, that a lousy bill was better than none.