Saturday, July 29, 2006
R: The New Scarlet Letter
Apologies to Nathaniel Hawthorne, but it appears that there's a new scarlet letter in town and it begins with the letter R. Earlier this week, The Hill poked at suburban Buffalo Congressman Tom Reynolds, who is leading the Republican attempt to retain control of Congress, because he conveniently forgot that he was a Republican in his campaign literature, in his TV ads, and on his website.
So we decided to take a look at Sue Kelly's new campaign site and shock of shocks, the word Republican is MIA on her site too. It's not on this page, or this one or even this one.
Are things really so bad for Republicans in New York that they have to pretend that they're not Republicans? And exactly how do they plan to get rid of the Republican label on the ballot come November?
Comments:
<< Home
Truly amazing... It isn't anywhere on her site. You will also notice that this website is fancier and full of more hyperbole than usual. She is clearly scared. The voters of NY-19 will hopefully see through this crap.
Even that lobbyist darling John Sweeney from NY-20 mentions he's a Republican on his website, although it's at the bottom of his bio.
http://www.sweeneyforcongress2006.com/Biography
We've got to get these bums out of office.
Even that lobbyist darling John Sweeney from NY-20 mentions he's a Republican on his website, although it's at the bottom of his bio.
http://www.sweeneyforcongress2006.com/Biography
We've got to get these bums out of office.
side step Sue at her normal. Avoid any issue at all costs if it means
her constituents might start paying
attention to her actions...
And speaking of costs, Sue cites her unending concern about spending our taxpayers money and slashes spending wherever it does not affect the rich or big business.
So how is it I am getting quite expensive,glossy, bragging literature paid for by, you guessed it, the taxpayers?
her constituents might start paying
attention to her actions...
And speaking of costs, Sue cites her unending concern about spending our taxpayers money and slashes spending wherever it does not affect the rich or big business.
So how is it I am getting quite expensive,glossy, bragging literature paid for by, you guessed it, the taxpayers?
I love the link in the area where it tells all (that they want you to know) about Sue. In her "personal" message, there's a link that syas you can use the website to'ask a question." When I clicked on it, I got a "blank page- file not found" message! That's right, you CAN'T ask a question!
Doesn't that just about sum up Sue's attitude to her constituents?
Doesn't that just about sum up Sue's attitude to her constituents?
So now they're not party loyalists anymore, they're "independent thinkers who work hard for their constituents" or some other blather.
How do Democrats make with work for themselves? It shouldn't be too hard. Pelosi is saying that in order for the Dems to get up, they have to take the Repubs down. But they're already doing this on their own!
How do we thank them?
How do Democrats make with work for themselves? It shouldn't be too hard. Pelosi is saying that in order for the Dems to get up, they have to take the Repubs down. But they're already doing this on their own!
How do we thank them?
As things get worse across the board - American power and prestige continue to deflate, prices escalate - more for gasoline, food, health care, schools, local and state taxes - and Republicans respond by diddling with gay marriage bans, stem cell bans and more millionaire tax giveaways, we move closer and closer to a "throw the bums out" fever in the fall.
No amount of Sue Kelley "I'm a caring Congresswomen who spreads the wealth, especially in camnpaign season" (I dont' think I have EVER heard so much coming from her as I have these last two months. She's usually invisible) will save her.
She's in real trouble, especially if Spitzer and Clinton have the coat tails some are talking about.
And all this without a single Democratic nominee.
No amount of Sue Kelley "I'm a caring Congresswomen who spreads the wealth, especially in camnpaign season" (I dont' think I have EVER heard so much coming from her as I have these last two months. She's usually invisible) will save her.
She's in real trouble, especially if Spitzer and Clinton have the coat tails some are talking about.
And all this without a single Democratic nominee.
# posted by 
: 11:09 PM
: 11:09 PM
Glad to see that Sue's Web Lackey has fixed the link to let you ask Sue a question. Glad to see that you guys read the comments on Take 19. Not so glad that Sue never does anything about the comments here, except maybe to complain about us in campaign literature, and spend her time voting against the interests of the overwhelmingly middle-class citizens in her own district!
Since Sue seems to pay more attention to what's said here, let me just point out to her that none of us are enjoying this, but we feel like we are forced into doing this because of YOUR total disregard of our wishes. Instead, you favor the agenda of the GOP leadership. When you were a patient's advocate, would you have taken the side of the HMOs? When you were a florist, would you give the cutomer red carnations, when they asked for white? Why then do you promote yourself as a moderate, in tune with our middle-class suburban values, then go and vote against those same values 83% of the time?
Start planning for your retirement, Sue, because we've had enough...
Post a Comment
Since Sue seems to pay more attention to what's said here, let me just point out to her that none of us are enjoying this, but we feel like we are forced into doing this because of YOUR total disregard of our wishes. Instead, you favor the agenda of the GOP leadership. When you were a patient's advocate, would you have taken the side of the HMOs? When you were a florist, would you give the cutomer red carnations, when they asked for white? Why then do you promote yourself as a moderate, in tune with our middle-class suburban values, then go and vote against those same values 83% of the time?
Start planning for your retirement, Sue, because we've had enough...
<< Home
