![[info]](http://l-stat.livejournal.com/img/userinfo.gif?v=92.1){kind=small}
The congressional race in my district causes me no end of dismay. As some may remember from awhile ago, Mason and I sent a letter to our US representative expressing our displeasure with his performance and pledging not to vote for him. He's nauseatingly conservative, a fact amerliorated only by the fact that he's a follower rather than a leader whose big leaderly push is a law that would require all future legislation to include a section detailing exactly which section of the Constitution authorizes the legistlation. Wow. That's what I call an urgent national priority.
I'm gonna keep my promise, but there's really no one to vote for, so I'll have to leave that section blank.
OK, so that's not entirely true. He does have one opponent, Mark Yannone. Even if I didn't find his ideas hopelessly unworkable (which I do), I find his entire attitude entirely unbecoming someone who aspires to be a publicly elected official. Read this news release from Mr. Yannone. Really. Read it.
Real statesmanlike, Marky boy.
I've done Web searches on the guy before, and this is entirely in character. He really acts like a petulant know-it-all who's never gotten over being bullied in high school. For the record, I'm a know-it-all, but I'm not terribly petulant and I got over being bullied.
So clearly I can't toss my vote there. What to do, what to do ...
* Standing back now to await Marky's nastygrams. I'll post any here if I get them.*
Anonymous
May 25 2006, 10:11:19 UTC 6 years ago
Maybe this time you'll read rather than delete?
I don't have a copy of what I wrote, but I'm pretty sure that my response last time would have been the same as my response now: What do you think you read in my PR Web press release? Go back and read it. Really--read it: http://prweb.com/releases/2004/10/prwebxEverything I wrote was true, and what I revealed was detrimental to the voters of my district and the citizens of this nation. In fact, much of the news today has been generated as a direct result of the passage of the USA PATRIOT Act, which I referred to in that press release.
Bear in mind that John Shadegg had $650,000 to spend on the last election, and he spent most of it just running against me. He has $450,000 to spend this year, much of it from the pharmaceutical industry as a result of his vote for the "Government Drug Store." Preferring to run on integrity and honesty about the issues instead of other people's money, I spent $100 and got 20 percent of the vote. I didn't accept contributions from anyone, nor did I accept so-called "clean elections" money. So when I attack my opponent's voting record and blow my own horn a little it's because no one else is going to do it. The newspaper covers for him, the lobbyists keep him well-financed, and we get royally screwed by his votes.
I don't care if that's not statemanlike. I'm not willing to lie or soft-peddle my opponent's many crimes.
June 7 2006, 16:38:08 UTC 5 years ago
Re: Maybe this time you'll read rather than delete?
I'll grant you definitely have a point. I think what I was on about at the time was the tone of the release, and the fact that the headline and lead seemed a little petulant. I mean, in an election cycle people are (at least theoretically) interested in the issues, which were further down in your release, and less interested in whether or not your information is in a newspaper's database; it's hard to get excited about that last, and it seemed that was what you were most focused on.It's a question of the structure, tone and wording of the release; I would have written it differently. But I also should have been a little less snarky when I wrote my initial commentary; for that, I apologize again.
On John Shadegg's record you'll get absolutely no argument from me, as you can find by looking through past entries I've written about him. If you're running again this cycle, I wish you all the best -- please forgive my ignorance on the subject, but I moved out of the district last February and so haven't been following things as closely anymore. What's more, I'm (miraculously) actually happy with my present representation in Congress.
You may be somewhat pleased, though, to know that everyone in my family who lived in the district (and they still do) voted for you that last time and will presumably continue to do so as long as other parties persist in ignoring that district. And despite my earlier comments, I did, too. I may not always find you to be the most diplomatic of political aspirants, but I did largely like the substance of what you had to say!