|
Please Don't Miss and
|
|
Tuesday, 26 September 2006
|
|
MURTHA in Trouble?
Contributed by 1stCav Murtha is now in a hellava fight for his seat in PA district 12. Some of our pack of Old War Dogs are helping to make a difference. Keep up the good work this weekend Dogs!. Wish I could be there. Two active duty Marine nephews are telling me that their respective units totally despise Murtha. That fits with the overwhelming majority of veterans and other active duty troops informally polled. Article is Diana Irey is pulling very close to defeating the once thought well entrenched and funded Murtha. This is gonna get real interesting especially with losers Max Cleland and sissy Wes Clark trying to counter the Veterans For The Truth (VFTT), the rally, and the grassroots campaign against Murtha. How dare Murtha say our troops "killed innocent civilians in cold blood" even before a final investigation is complete. A little would go a long way to help retire the traitorous Murtha.
WHEN: 11 AM
|
|
Contributed by 1stCav on September 26, 2006 at 11:20 AM in , , , | Comments Posted by: Dave M Well first, your quote on Murtha calling the Marines "Cold Blooded murderers" is incorrect. He stated the Marines "killed innocent civilians in cold blood," There is a difference, but your quote is out of context. You have an obligation to get your facts correct. Like the man or not, not stating what he said correctly, will make people dislike you for the same reasons you dislike him. As for Ms. Irey stating fundraising investigation, is clearly a desperate move by a desperate candidate. Posted by: Dave M | Sep 26, 2006 12:21:52 PM Posted by: 1st Cav Note: Author corrected exact statement of Murtha to "killed innocent civilians in cold blood" ...a technicality IMHO. Author: 1st Cav combat Veteran of Vietnam ps I certainly do NOT see this as a desperate move by Irey. It's called exposing the truth and keeping the pressure on. If it's not true then let Murtha defend it. Posted by: 1st Cav | Sep 26, 2006 12:43:26 PM Posted by: Dave M First, let me thank you for correcting the Quote. Second, I would much rather hear Ms. Irey tell me as a voter of the 12th CD how is she going to serve the district as our Congresswoman, as opposed to a side show for the press. That is all this was, yet another distraction from her campaign. The Boot Murtha people are not running against Murtha, they don't like him and that is their right as Americans to say so and do so. Ms. Irey is trying to win his seat, rather than dip into what her opponent has done or not done, what will she do for us? Where's the Beef I ask in her campaign? She brings a more polarized position on the topics she has spoke about than Mr. Murtha, and many of them she has not spken to at all. I am sure she is a fine elected official in Washington County, but the more I hear her speak, the more her platform falls apart and the substance of her arguments fade. With that, I am sure she is trying anything to claw more votes, hence asking for an investigation on a non policy issue. I am sure Mr. Murtha will defend himself, he won't shy away from this, but I would rather hear why she is opposed to raising the minimum wage or why we should have prayer back in school than this. Or why she feels the government should be involved in the personal life of its people by dictating life decisions, or better yet how she sees the taxing and spending as an issue when her own party has been in charge of the congress and making the decisions. Her position statements to me, show short sightedness and a lack for understanding how Capital Hill works and I do not think she would serve the 12th CD well at all if she would win. Thank you for your forum. Posted by: Dave M | Sep 26, 2006 6:29:21 PM Posted by: 1st Cav I can't speak for Mrs. Irey, but her stance on most issues of concern to you are posted on her website at this URL; http://www.irey.com/issues/ Speaking for myself, what Murtha did when he essentially called our Marines murderers cancels out EVERYTHING he has ever done good. Put yourself in those Marines' boots, and see how you like to being pre-judged while in combat and have a congressman pronounce you guilty? A congressman who flirts with Code Pink communist that hold protest at Walter Reed while our wounded warriors are healing. BTW, if you count all the hours our troops actually work and are away from home.they probably earn less than minimum wage. Posted by: 1st Cav | Sep 26, 2006 8:31:17 PM Posted by: Great post William, and you got some conversation started. I'm glad you emailed some dogs about your post or I might have missed it. To Dave M. It is obvious that hard ball politics are being played on both sides. Your attack on tactics is a typical liberal smoke screen in a sad attempt to hide the real vulnerability; Murtha's CHARACTER. They may both tax and spend, either may pander to their base, but Murtha's pathetic plea to party bosses for the Whip position was slapped down by his own Capitol Hill Pals. NO, Murtha sold his soul and sold out our troops for his 15 minutes of fame. If there is justice in this universe, the clock is running out on this sad whimpering old man. If you would vote for this aberration because he
Posted by: | Sep 26, 2006 8:58:30 PM Posted by: Dave M 1st Cav - I agree with you and have tried to speak to the Irey campaign about my issues, the funny thing is I often run into attitudes like gray dog that any question on policy is liberal whining. I never got a solid response, just a retort back on some part of her opponents character. So her stance on Minumum wage is what it is because Murtha has lost touch? I cannot track with that. I work with the 28th ID(m) and know for a fact and see the hardships these soldiers go through, I can't imagine how they make it on the pay they get. Your points are right on target there. Gray Dog - I find it interesting that you call my observations and opinion a Liberal Smoke Screen, when in both of my previous posts I have not mentioned or called out either side of the isle, conservatives or liberals. I merely pointed out the very Fox News like approach to her campaign lately, deflecting what she really stands for to attack Murtha. As I stated above, you have every right to not like the man, that is what seperates us from so many places in the world. Your last points about what makes people vote for a person, goes deeper than a blog as it asks the question of what is a Representatives elected job? To serve and provide for their districts, states, etc or is it for the greater good, and where do they draw the line? If you measure the amount that Mr. Murtha has provided for the 12th CD he clearly represents his district. Thank you again for this forum. Posted by: Dave M | Sep 26, 2006 10:33:59 PM Posted by: Hey William! Top of the page at BootMurtha. Wooohooo! I might tell them I am you this weekend. Maybe get a free beer or two. Well, I'll only use your name at the Pro-Murtha rally. In case I get arrested or some such. Walking around in all that OWD garb has taken on a new set of meanings. Can everyone say 'target'? [grin] Posted by: | Sep 26, 2006 11:55:19 PM Posted by: 1st Cav Dave M Many years ago in the mid 1970's I helped train some of the Infantry of the Pensylvania and New York AR/NG at Ft Drum, NY. I do believe some of them were elements of the 28th ID. The Regular Army saw fit to call me and a bunch of other combat veterans up to act as an agressor force on TDY. That was quite a hoot as we won all engagements and even captured the General and the whole HQ in broad daylight. Got a verbal commendation for that from a full bird... after being chewed out by the AR/NG CO. However, for morale purposes we did have much needed beer celebration (donated by the NG) on the last night of training. LOL Well the NG won that night (we let em) cause they had to or the CO probably wold have been shit canned. Made some friends from Wilkes Barre and was even invited to stay a few days with a Michael Wilks (sp?) (we called him "Twinkle Toes"). Had a very good time. Remember the warm welcome and hospitality of his Polish family. Some damn good people there. Anyway, one of your concerns seems to be about what Irey will do aabout the minimum wage. Just out of curiosity I googled < Murtha "minimum wage" > and came up with the below quotes and data from where elese but Diana Irey's website.Seems she's already addressed the issue back in August. [QUOTE] (MONONGAHELA, August 8) -- Washington County Commissioner and Pennsylvania 12th district Republican Congressional nominee Diana Irey -- responding to Jack Murtha's vote ten days ago against legislation that would have raised the minimum wage as it made permanent the repeal of the death tax -- today released the following statement: "Jack Murtha voted against an increase in the minimum wage ten days ago. In doing so, once again, he showed that he cares more about representing the values of San Francisco than he does about representing the values of southwestern Pennsylvania. As for Gray Dog and others in the Old War Dogs, we do run in a pack. Similar to a cohesive military unit that sticks together out of loyalty, friendship, and many times for survival necessity. Our pack likes to take care of others we consider within our larger pack (i.e. pre-judged and wounded troops). Seems evident to to me Murtha has abandoned any of his pack loyalty for political and financial gain. Without that a man "Don't Mean Nothin" when compared to minimum wages and such. Hell, Murtha didn't even fight for the 1,500 Union jobs lost in Pa when the Army (Shinsiki...sp?) made the decision to build the Strykers in Canada rather than the 113's in Pa. And the Strykers...would you feel safe in them? Yeah, Murtha really fought for the jobs and minimum wages in Pensylvania. Hey Zero...please do use my name, I got some good friends in Pa also. Thanks for nippin at suspected threats Gray Dog, but maybe ol Dave might see things our way if he ponders on the real meaning of loyalty. Something Murtha lost or may have never had.
Posted by: 1st Cav | Sep 27, 2006 2:46:56 AM Posted by: It is curious that some people want to make raising the minimum wage the focus of this campaign. The great majorioty of professional economists oppose raising the minimum wage because it leads to increased unemployment among the least qualified workers. They also note that the greatest number of minimum-wagers are teenagers, without real work experience, and still living at home. The dirty secret behind "minimum wage" is that in many organizations, particularly union shops, all other wages are defined as a multiple of the minimum. So when the minimum-wagers are mandated a raise by Congress, everyone else gets an automatic raise as well by act of contract. And of course, these increased costs get passed along to the consumers. I get more money from my raise, but spend it to get the same amount of higher-priced goods, so there is no real benefit. That is unless I was one of the marginal minimum- wagers displaced as no longe worth the higher costs. (Oops, there go our 'greeters'!) Oh there is one real beneficiary, those higher wages may just push some of those folks into the next tax bracket, though without any real increase of spending power. Thus giving a stealth tax increase. But hey! The sort of people who like raising minimum wages, also LOVE raising taxes. "involved in the personal life of its people by dictating life decisions" sounds like an embarassed way to mention abortion (there I said it) without saying it. But it also suggests a lot of other personal life decisions - like a viable freedom to attend the school of one's choice rather than the one dictated by a federal court and school board bureaucracy. Or to choose with whom one might wish to associate, or not assoicate. And is not the right to own firearms a "life decision"? Or the right to practice openly the religion of your choice - even if it happens to be the detested Christian faith? Or the right to maintain the majority culture, free of social engineering by self-declared elites? Perhaps even the right to raise one's own children according to one's own values might be considered a "life decision". Posted by: | Sep 27, 2006 5:24:14 PM |