Facebook
Fark
Digg
Reddit
Stumble
Sunday, March 28, 2010 | 2 a.m.
Harry Reid is dead, another in an occasional series:
The Senate majority leader may be strapped into the political execution chamber, but after the events of the last week, Republicans have to be wondering if Sue Lowden or Danny Tarkanian is up to administering the lethal injection come November.
The escalating confrontation between the front-runners has become emblematic of GOP Senate and congressional primaries across the country and in down-ticket Nevada legislative races.
The phenomenon occurs in Democratic primaries, too, but this year it is coursing through the GOP electorate: The stifling of any reasonableness or thoughtfulness to hew to what the candidates believe are the inflexible, doctrinaire positions of the majority of the relatively small number who will vote.
In Nevada’s Senate race, this dynamic has exposed the reflexive prevarication by one candidate and the opportunistic malleability of the other. I am not sure which is worse, but that will be for the GOP primary electorate to judge.
Let’s first look at Little Tark’s week.
Tarkanian seems to react viscerally — and sometime untruthfully — when confronted by interlocutors. But he has shown an uncanny ability in this race to push the Tea Party hot buttons, surely why Glenn Beck anointed him as that wing’s candidate. He calls Lowden the establishment candidate at every turn as a way to turn off the anti-establishment wing, which will make up a large part of the June 8 GOP electorate. And Tarkanian has pounded Lowden for her comments about the first Bush-era bailout, which he did again on Alan Stock’s KXNT 840-AM program last week.
Stock asked Tarkanian about a robocall in which he called Lowden a socialist and Tarkanian retorted, as reported by the Nevada News Bureau: “There is no socialism word in there. You are wrong on that, I guarantee you.”
But — and you know how this story ends — the word was in there, Little Tark’s guarantee notwithstanding. The robocall contains this line: “... she and the Republican establishment defended the Wall Street bailouts ... that’s not freedom … Let’s call it what it is: ‘socialism.’ ”
At first, Tarkanian’s campaign put out a news release with the actual robocall audio, the equivalent of a murderer turning in the weapon to police. The release: “As you can hear for yourself — Danny Tarkanian did not call Sue Lowden a “socialist.”
Well, no — only by extension. And Little Tark had guaranteed the word was not in the call. His campaign eventually had to apologize for Tark’s faulty memory, but his adamant, ready-shoot-aim tactics surely will get him in trouble, especially if he faces the $25 million bazooka in the general election.
Lowden’s performance on the issue Tarkanian has relentlessly used against her was equally — if not more — disturbing.
Her controversial comments about the bailout came two months ago in a story by venerable capital reporter Geoff Dornan. In 2009 Lowden had indicated she was opposed to the bailouts. But here’s how Dornan quoted her Jan. 10:
“It’s easy to say, no, I wouldn’t have voted for it. But people were panicked, we were facing collapse — that’s what they were saying. It’s easy to say from a distance I would have voted no, but I can’t do that.”
That is a perfectly reasonable, even thoughtful position by Lowden, who later would claim it was an “intellectual conversation” with a reporter she has known since she was a state senator.
But intellectual conversation has no place in primaries, and Tarkanian has been bludgeoning her ever since, and fairly effectively, as it plays into his theme of him as the, ahem, rebel, against her, the D.C. clone.
But instead of sticking to what many economists contemporaneously argued — i.e., the bailouts saved the economy from implosion — Lowden has succumbed to the politics of a GOP primary. Even though Tarkanian may have stretched to say she supported the bailout, it is a reasonable reading — and analogous to Tarkanian saying he didn’t call Lowden a socialist. In both cases, the inference could be made.
But now, apparently sensing Little Tark may have seized the Tea Party high ground, Lowden’s campaign has showed its spine — or lack thereof. “Sue would not have voted for the TARP or any of the other bailout bills in Congress ... period,” Lowden aide Robert Uithoven told the news bureau.
How convenient. How situational. How dishonest — in a different, but telling way from Little Tark. His was simply lying; hers was a metamorphosis from intellectual conversation to intellectual dishonesty.
Harry Reid may be dead. But judging by the character the front-runners are displaying to the Republican faithful as they genuflect for support, I’m still not sure the GOP voters won’t find a different Angle to pursue come June 8.
ZZZZZZZZZzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
Just a little confused but what elections for if the candidate can take each other on.
Its that what Obama and Clinton did
This just play time compared to the trash that Harry will pull.
They need to be readily
"His was simply lying; hers was a metamorphosis from intellectual conversation to intellectual dishonesty."
LMAO. It's lines like these that keep me coming back for more.
Jon Ralston, you are the best.
Mr. Ralston - A few things.
1) Referring to Danny Tarkanian as Little Tark is deeply disrespectful. Why don't you refer to Sue Lowden as the prom queen, Barbie or Miss New Jersey. It is obvious you are taking sides.
2) The Socialist word was used in reference to the act. Much like when you tell your teenager they are acting like a two year old. You didn't call them a two year old. You said there acts were those of a two year old. Danny denied calling Sue a socialist because he did not. But the act of voting for the bailouts (by Republicans and Sue's admission she would have considered it) was a socialist act. Sue is the queen of spin.
3) Talking about Sue's ethics. First, her company had an SEC filing against them 4 years ago for giving 8 million dollars in stock to her relatives and devaluing other shareholders stock. They have never responded other than to say we have more stock so we can do what we want. Two was her flat out LIE to the RGJ a a couple weeks back. When the reporter caught the lie,Sue suddenly had to "set the record strait". 3) My favorite was her tag line on her commercial "fighting for your job is my job". That while she had just laid off 25% of her Laughlin employees, took away their employee 401K and her and her husband took nearly $1,000,000 in salaries and bonuses.
What a fighter!!!
For the truth on Lowden see
www.muthsuntruths.wordpress.com
By Ralston's own words, he proves that he is the liar, not Tarkanian...
"Stock asked Tarkanian about a robocall in which he called Lowden a socialist and Tarkanian retorted, as reported by the Nevada News Bureau: "There is no socialism word in there. You are wrong on that, I guarantee you."
But -- and you know how this story ends -- the word was in there, Little Tark's guarantee notwithstanding. The robocall contains this line: "... she and the Republican establishment defended the Wall Street bailouts ... that's not freedom " Let's call it what it is: 'socialism.' "
...Alan Stock asked Tark if he had called Lowden a "socialist" and he rightly denied it. And he rightly said that the word "socialist" as describing Lowden is not in the robocall.
For Ralston to twist these words and deceitfully claim Tarkanian is a liar is a new low for even Ralston.
Thinks for that post.
I fell asleep trying to read his column.
The tap dance that Ralston had to make his point was pretzel making at its worst.
So Ralston says that Tark lied about calling Lowden a socialist.
Even if one does the pretzel tap dance only one can say that Tark is calling the Republican establishment that defended Wall Street bailouts as socialists.
As far as I know she has not defended the Wall Street bailouts.
I will go back to sleep.
If Ralston does one of his imaginery discussions between people then give me a call.
I need more toilet paper.
The converstion was started by Stock asking about the add in which "Tarkanian called Lowden a Socialist". He did deny that. He said he never called Lowden a Socialist in an add and Stock kept saying he did. Danny said he was not aware of that and he would verify with his staff. Then DANNY BROUGHT UP THE ADD in which there were three sections. The first two sections specific to Lowden and the third in reference to anyone voting for the bailout as having committed a Socialist act. He clarified the whole thing. Lowden was the one who kept yelling that she was called a Socialist. We know she is not a Socialist. She in the winner of a scholaship contest.
Lowden 2010: "All she said is it's easy for people to (play) Monday morning quarterback (for) votes," Uithoven said. "It's easy for him and others to say they would have voted no. But Sue Lowden is not willing to say it was an easy vote for (Congress)." (LAS VEGAS SUN/Jan. 20, 2010
Reality: NEVADA APPEAL/Jan. 17, 2010 --
Lowden had different reactions to the bank bail-out legislation and the stimulus package.
On bail-out spending: "It's easy to say, no, I wouldn't have voted for it. But people were panicked, we were facing collapse -- that's what they were saying. It's easy to say from a distance I would have voted no, but I can't do that."
In hindsight, he (Uithoven, Lowden Manager) said TARP was bad legislation but that Lowden is focused on the future.
CHUCK MUTH (president of Citizen Outreach and Nevada Conservative blogger/Oct. 10, 2008
http://www.opinioneditorials.com/guestco...
"this deal (the bailout) stunk like yesterday's diapers"
It was the government's way of calling the "garbage man" a "sanitary engineer." It was, indeed, a con. The people didn't buy it -- but Congress did
It all came down to this fundamental philosophical question: Is home ownership a "right" or a "privilege"? Conservatives instinctively know the answer is "privilege." Home ownership is something to be earned. You save enough money for a down payment and establish a credit record of trustworthiness.
QUESTION: Why can she give a definitive answer on the stimulus but not bailouts? In either case she was on the outside of Congress and did not have the full story. To say you can take a definitive position but not the other makes no sense.
Also - Lets not forget the State Republican convention in 2008. Sue Lowden was the Chairman and the following from the National Commitee is part of the record:
NOTE: The Contest Committee that reviewed the controversy surrounding the state convention was made up of nine representatives of the National Republican Party. The committee consisted of two state chairpersons and seven committeemen and committeewomen from various states. Here is a direct quote from the report:
"The Committee on Contests, however, is deeply troubled by the ineptness of the State
Party in conducting its process to select delegates and alternate delegates to the
national convention. This committee rejects any process to select delegates and
alternate delegates that restricts party grassroots activists from participating in that
process, as appears to be the case here.
In its certification to the RNC, required to be filed by September 4, 2007, the Nevada
State Party certified that it would elect its national convention delegates and alternate
delegates at its state convention. The record before this committee is clear that this did
not occur. Rather the record reflects that delegates to the national convention were
selected by the State Party's Executive Committee via teleconference after the state
convention failed to elect delegates and the State Party failed to reconvene the state
convention. The Committee finds the State Party's delegate selection process flawed,
inadequate, and unacceptable."
Sue Lowden can run the state party but is going to help run the country. I think NOT!
So, is all of this controversy dependent on what the definition of "is" is?
Conversation with a Friend:
I was having lunch with a friend teh other day, as I noticed a look of despair on his face. I asked would he like to share his thoughts with me? He said "yes I would". He said, you know I have been a member of the Republican Party for a long, long time and this is one time I can truly say that I'am deeply concerned about the state of affairs.
What, I find concerning and most troubling is the platform or lack of platform that our Party is running on. We have moved from the Party of "NO" to the Party of "HELL NO".
We are not a Party of "SUBSTANCE", because all the Party leaders do is instead of providing a "workable alternative to the Democrats" is to yell "SLOGANS". A case in point is, they will say "we are going to take our country back" I ask back from whom? Better yet if we do take our country back, what are we going to do with it?
Secondly, the Party has failed to present a compelling alternative story of what is wrong with the health care system or how they would fix it.
All I could hear was "let's stop and start over", "let's stop and start over". Still, I ask what was going to be different? Again, nothing but "SlOGANS", "KILL THE BILL".
The advice I would give the Party leaders and the Repulican Party as a whole is what my Grandfather use to say to us "IT'S A LOT EASIER TO GIVE BIRTH, THAN TO PREFORM A RESURRECTION".
Hey Ralston i am so glad that Harry Reid is the most honest politician ever. What a joke this article is, as if any politician is ever completely honest about anything.
Meanwhile...
http://www.harryreid.com/ee/index.php/ne...
The Republicans have spent heavily at bondage strip clubs and fancy hotels in LA. Why don't they support Vegas?
Ralston should be sent to Socal to investigate why Michael Steele's party has spent this money there (and not here).
Also, a story should be done on the health benefits of the 1/2 pound chili cheese dog available at Lowden's Laughlin Casino.
We now have major scandels. The teaparty express, is that a money making endeavor? What are the Republican connections to it? And what about Sean Hannity's Freedom concerts? Premier Marketing owned by a Jerry Falwell associate? The "Freedom Alliance" (Ollie North founder)who's mission statement says nothing about raising money for scholarships for orphans of dead soilders. What about the radio station that promotes Lowden, Tarkanian and Sean Hannity?
What about the concerts at the local arena in Las Vegas? did the money go to who? What about the expensive books and gifts sold at the concert? Why does the charity promote Olliver North's speaking events? Who get's the money from that? The Freedom Alliance does more than the charity for children of Vets, but it's marketed otherwise.
I wonderif someone is going to complain to AG Maesto?
We should all support Assemblyman Chad Christensen in the primary. At least we know where he stands because he has a conservative voting record that everyone can see. Let's help Chad win the primary and then Harry Reid!!
http://www.christensen2010.com
From an impartial perspective and a little help from Mark Twain " I would much prefer to suffer from the clean incision of an honest lancet than from sweetened poison" To many premature epitaphs regarding Senator Reid along with vicious name calling regarding ethics.If indeed the most recent legislation spells the demise of his future as well as that of many others would that not clarify the state of his ethics.How many would stand for what they believed in even if it meant their death?At ground level it would appear that fear not reason fuels the opposition. Where one stands others are compelled to do so as well and a deep primal force comes into play. It is the difference between cowardly self preservation and responsibility.I am a conservative centrist Republican and yet I am ashamed of these tactics.By all accounts Mr.Reid has delivered many pieces of relevant legislation helpful to Nevada.Tourism bill job stimulus, clean energy, that is some report card. Before anything I am a Nevadian. Some may argue the timing but what better time than now when we are in need. Others may argue still that not enough has been done for Nevada by its most influential son.From my rudimentary understanding of his title and position it is all 50 states that he must build cohesiveness and legislation for. The most prominent feature that stands out in my mind and bears testament to the inner thoughts of this public person is his recent remarks regarding oppositional rally in his home town that they were indeed welcome because that is what America is all about a simple humbling expression that puts it all in perspective. You sir have my vote this November.
wow, little john does have some power...I guess it hurts when he is called out!
ENSIGN was supposedly paying only $650 to $950 a month for an expensive room and board deal at the plush c street cult house. Some say the IRS imputed value would be $3000-$4000 a month, based on comparable living arrangements in that D.C. neighborhood.
Therefore Ensign would have to claim that on his taxes or count the deal as a campaign contribution.
Also since c street is set up as a Church, why are they allowed to donated to a politician in this manor???
Looks like Ensign has got some more problems and explaining to do. Guess he'll have to call his talk radio buddy for the softball interview.
Is there a quid pro quo regarding that radio station???
Geez to think I used to respect this clown.
Hey Jon on the laser thin shot Harry wins,maybe he will throw you a bone.Don't hold your breath !