Saturday, August 04, 2007

Joe NOllenberg launches campaign against Joe Knollenberg

Joe NOllenberg launched his campaign today in White Lake, but Joe Knollenberg never showed up.  Here's some video from the event.



The host of the party, who's aligned with Democrats on the issues, brought us some ice cream.





5 comments:

Chet said...

Bruce, I'm glad you posted the video of the ice cream.

First, it doesn't prove he "aligned with Democrats on the issues", although he may "support what the protestors are doing" from a little d democratic perspective or support their opposition to the war. But for you twist his words and says he's aligned with the Democrats on the issues PROVES THAT YOU ARE A PARTISAN HACK and the attack on Joe is a party-based attack, not a principled one in opposition to the war. Quite to your surprise, I support almost all protestors and their right to protest (if police had come and hauled you away, I'd have published the video and condemned it), but I also support the right of others to genuinely probe your motivations and purposes to know what context to place that information in voting for a candidate. Many of the people your financiers have imported into the district are genuinely single-issue folks who care about the war issue. I was impressed with the Ann Arbor preist's ability to focus on the issue intellectually - rather than as a personal issue. But your conduct and the overall conduct of the protest is orchestrated, mechanized for partisan purposes, and clearly not sincere.

I gave my name and card to anyone who asked. I even answered questions on the war - which I have concerns about in its operation. You are an evasive freak who on one hand "demands" to speak to the Congressman, but when asked by a member of the public (who might very well have the ability to relay at least some of your message) what you would say has only a one-sentence line in response. What point would you speaking to the Congressman have if your merely going to repeat the one-sentence answer you gave me.

Chet said...

You know what else that ice cream guy proves -- one of the nastier of your protesters called all Republicans evil and said they all make more than $40 million, etc.

That ice cream guy proves the diversity of the Republican party and the generosity of the families associated with and friends of Joe Knollenberg or Thad McCotter.

Even the Republican Party has candidates on both sides of this issue (Ron Paul comes to mind), although it could be said that the Democrats have Hillary Clinton who simultaneously occupies both sides of the issue and they certainly have in their Senate caucus Joe Lieberman (elected as an I, but declared as a D in voting for Pelosi) who supports the war entirely. I haven't seen you guys protest them, and their individual Senate votes would have far more impact than in the House. Indeed, since Democrats control both houses, shoring up your own votes would seem to be a more important angle of protest than attacking only coincidentally-swing-seat incumbent Republicans.

You don't care about the war - the war is a sick, crass political tool for you to take advantage of for your "party". In my mind, that's more morally bankrupt than someone who supports the war because they might believe it either necessary or wrong to leave in the situation we've created (which, in fact, is not morally wrong even if it turns out to be a bad judgement). If MoveOn were serious and not a Dem Party apparatus, they'd start kicking the tushes of some Democratic members to light a fire under them.

Bruce Fealk said...

You don't say, Chet.

With Liberty & Justice for all . . . said...

There you go again Chet -- "clearly not sincere?!?"

I don't care to speak for other people, but I have no doubt that everyone who has been participating is nothing but sincere.


And since when does anyone have an obligation to respond to YOUR questions just because that person is asking a public official to give some deliberation to their decisions???

Do you not understand that there is a difference between the responsibility and obligations of a public official to respond to a constituent versus those of a private citizen?

Let me give you a clue -- the elected official was elected to represent the voice of the people and is therefore accountable to the people.

Of course, that is where Knollenberg falls completely flat -- he won't talk to his constiuents unless they are dues paying members of the Republican Party.

Your giving out your card is of no consequence -- it is entirely voluntary.

With Liberty & Justice for all . . . said...

Oh wait. Now you are just trying to be funny.

The "diversity" of the Republican Party? Now that is funny.

Are you referring to all the white guys running for President for your Party?

Or maybe the 3 white guys who make up the state House Republican leadership?

Or is it the 2 white guys that make up the Republican state Senate leadership?

Or maybe the 3 white people that run the Oakland County Republican Party?

Or are you referring to all of the white men or women in your Congressional Caucus?

There is so much diversity it is just hard to choose -- that is if you redefine diversity to be all white & upper class suburbanites.

What a joke.