RE: Chafee's Response to National Review
Marc Comtois
Thanks to Don for pointing out the Chafee campaign's response to the National Review endorsement of Mayor Laffey. To be equitable, here is the text of the letter:
I read with amusement National Review Online’s recent endorsement of Cranston, Rhode Island Mayor Stephen Laffey as a “conservative” in his GOP challenge to Sen. Lincoln Chafee.
For anyone with even a cursory knowledge of Mr. Laffey’s record, the idea of describing him as you did as a tax cutting, pro-life conservative is just plain ludicrous.
Since he became mayor, Laffey has raised taxes a whopping 20 percent — hiking the average Cranston homeowner’s tax bill by $1,000 three short years ago, while also increasing government spending. In fact under Laffey Cranston taxpayer dollars were spent on among other things; an increase in the number of employees in the Mayor’s office, money to soundproof the walls of his own office, and a new luxury SUV for him to drive.
NRO also overlooked the fact that Laffey has consistently flip-flopped on his views on abortion. Laffey says one thing when he talks with editorial boards in Washington, but when meeting with potential voters he has offered just about everything except a clear answer. Just this fall Laffey said that while he was “pro-life” he considered Roe v. Wade “settled law” so “let it go.” Even more puzzling, when asked whose position on choice he most admired, Laffey stated he believes Hillary Clinton offers a reasonable position!
In contrast, Senator Chafee represents a winning blend of fiscal conservatism, traditional Republican values, and progressive ideals. He has a strong pro-business and pro-economic growth record as reflected by his recent endorsement by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. He has also twice been designated the Senate’s “most fiscally responsible” member by the Concord Coalition for his support of a Pay-As-You-Go approach to federal spending and for his efforts to eliminate the deficit. Up here in Rhode Island, those are the kinds of values we associate with Republicans: they are in favor of individual freedoms, they promote economic development, and they never support deficit growth. The only fact that NRO seemed to grasp and that recent polls reflect is that a Laffey win in a primary would likely ensure a Democratic victory in November.
In their zeal to denounce Sen. Chafee, it would appear that the editors of National Review have instead been sold a bill of goods. While Mr. Laffey may be a smooth talker, when criticizing Senator Chafee's opposition to deficit-creating tax cuts, the Mayor’s own record is one of lust for revenue-generating property tax increases.
It is clear that Laffey is no conservative. But don’t take my word for it, take Laffey’s. In a September 16, 2005 story in the Providence Journal, Laffey himself admitted, that “when you say the word ‘conservative,’ I don’t even know what that means.”
Ian Lang
Campaign Manger
Chafee for Senate
Warwick, Rhode Island
11:30 AM
One more time:
Lang's limp defense of Chafee's lack of leadership, vision, and senatorial gravitas (not very well disguised as an attack) has the same garbage we have all discussed numerous times on this and other blogs for months.
Trying to convince Cranstonians of these lies is folly, while using them to pollute the broader national NRO audience should push people to do some research (www.electlaffey.com). Those who take the time to look into this slander will see it just as that.
Lang and his boss need to start the process of responding to the Laffey campaign's desire to put on a series of debates so the two men can face off publicly on all the issues. Taricani, Mulligan, Rappleye, Hummel, MacKay... where are you?
As I predicted months ago, Chafee, Lang, and the NRSC will stave this inevitable meeting off as long as they can. I doubt it, but sooner or later the clamber from the voters and the press could make it happen.
J Mahn
It's quite remarkable that the best Ian Lang and Chafee campaign can do is continue to harp on the fact the Laffey had to raise taxes in Cranston. Serious minds don't take kindly to ignorant and specious arguments.
Does Ian Lang and Chafee not realize that Laffey was re-elected 65%-35% in Democratic Cranston AFTER he raised taxes.
You might think that the Chafee campaign (and the NRSC, for that matter) would have a simple intellectual curiosity as to why that happened.
If the Chafee camp is just betting that the voters are just plain ignorant and don't understand what happened in Cranston they are in for a big suprise.
Club for Growth Endorsement
National Review Endorsement
Steve Forbes Endorsement
Laffey is the ONLY Republican in this race!
Just as Linc Chafee has tried to define what the term "Republican" means, this pathetic response in NRO is yet another deliberate effort by the Chafee campaign to try to redefine and mangle the word "conservative" to somehow include Chafee (and to not include Laffey). This is mainly because Laffey's base of support within the Republican Party tends to be center-right (like the national GOP), and Chafee's, well, tends to be in the other party altogether. It's a nice strategy, but not one that will ultimately work, as it isn't based in truth.
Laffey made the hard choices that he needed to make in order to save Cranston from financial ruin. He cut spending wherever he legally could and he had to bring revenue in line with expenditures. He didn't have the choice of running a deficit year after year like the federal government. Laffey has every right to be proud of his record of accomplishment, which is "conservative" in every sense of the word. As much as the Chafee folks might like it, he's not going to run away from that.
Chafee on the other hand, doesn't have a record of accomplishment. He has been a miserable failure as a US Senator. The only thing he seems to be "proud" of, is throwing more federal pork that we can't afford our way in a last ditch effort to buy Rhode Islanders' votes. He seems to believe that the only way he can get ahead is by trying to mischaracterize the accomplishments of his opponent. It will fail.
As I sit here at the beach and watch the waves roll in...I must say it and I don't like to say this, because of his father, ....but say it I will.
And I will say it and only say it once...
Lincoln Chaffee is the worst U.S. Senator in the Country. Out of 100 he is last.
Say what you will about Chafee, but Laffey is unelectable. He'd get crushed in a RI general election and I will not be part of a movement that causes us to lose our Republican seat in Congress. If Chafee loses that seat, it will remain with the Democrats for 30 years. It's time for the people on this page to wise up and support a WINNER.
>>Say what you will about Chafee, but Laffey is unelectable. He'd get crushed in a RI general election and I will not be part of a movement that causes us to lose our Republican seat in Congress. If Chafee loses that seat, it will remain with the Democrats for 30 years. It's time for the people on this page to wise up and support a WINNER.
We lost "our Republican seat in Congress" the day Linc arrived.
If we must choose between adherence to Republican principles and potentially trading in what is now a virtual Democratic Senate seat for the real thing, I'll take principle anytime. At least I'll be able to look at myself in the mirror and be proud to have tried. It's worth the risk.
Actually, Senator Chafee is a true Republican in the classic sense. These values include:
-Supporting an engaged foreign policy and a strong national defense;
-Continuing the Party's recognition that government does have a role to play in protecting our environment; and
-Respecting the individual as evidenced by limiting government interference in their lives.
I think it's a shame that our party has been "hijacked" by the extreme right. The reasons for the foundation of the Republican party have been twisted out of shape.
Just look at the out of control spending by this administration and congress. If we operated a company like this we would be in jail.
I would suggest that if more politicians were as responsible as Lincoln Chafee, we would be better off as a nation.
Greg, if you think the current GOP has moved to the Right of classic Republicanism, and that Chaffee represents the true and original ideals of the party, you're either very young, or...there's some other, less charitable explanation. Because that is, not to put too fine a point on it, totally whack.
Greg:
On your points...
-Chafee is against the war on terror
-His vote to give billions $$$ to Oil Cos. is anti evnvironment
-Chafee Voted against Tax Cuts and Voted for Earmark/Pork spending along with current congress.
You are out of touch with reality or worse, a lying propagandist. Either way you are wrong.
Chafee is the problem not the solution.
Laffey is the only true republican in this race.
J Mahn
>>Respecting the individual as evidenced by limiting government interference in their lives.
>>I think it's a shame that our party has been "hijacked" by the extreme right. The reasons for the foundation of the Republican party have been twisted out of shape.
>Just look at the out of control spending by this administration and congress. If we operated a company like this we would be in jail.
"Extreme right" gives away where Greg is coming from.
"Government interference" is a cute euphemism for Chafee's support of abortion - killing one unborn human being so as not to "interfere" with another is, to Chafee, "just ducky."
The "out of control" spending is a legitimate criticism - except that Chafee's answer is to raise taxes, not cut spending.
And not to let the Republicans in Congress off the hook, but (as here in RI) the biggest drivers of spending are government employee pay / benefits and WELFARE (Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid). And we all know what the Democrats (including Chafee) will do and say if the Republicans attempt to cut WELFARE.
So (again, not letting them off the hook, particulary as regards earmarks) the Republicans have done what they can - cut tax rates - while leaving spending on its trajectory so as not to incur the Democrat-driven wrath of "seniors" and other welfare beneficiaries.
Greg is yet another Chafee shill, but one with a self-serving plan:
1. Throw a fundraiser for Chafee
http://www.gregnedwetzky.org/events.htm
2. Get an endorsement (after the checks clear, of course)
http://www.gregnedwetzky.org/ch_endorse.swf
3. Hit the blogs to paint his mealticket as a "True Republican."
Nice try, rookie.
Oz,
Greg is a Republican. He is active in his community and is an asset to the RIGOP.
Disagree all you want. Engage in debate and let the best man emerge. However, just because he disagrees with your candidate is no reason to label him a "shill." Since you support Mayor Laffey, does that make you a "shill", "hack", or "lap-dog"?
I have felt for some time that the tone of this primary debate is hurting the Republican cause in this state. Nowhere is that more evident than now, when local candidates brave enough to step forward and identify themselves as Republicans are attacked for their support of a given candidate.
The GOP needs to be a big tent. Let's not canabalize ourselves on a state-level for the sake of our national interests.
Can't wait till sept 12, Laffey crushes Chafee. Crush Crush Crush. Yeee Haaa. Crush. I mean it is almost too funny. Have fun guys....CRUSH
Mr. Nedwetzky,
Let me second what "johnb" said, but with the caveat that one should enter the Chafee/Laffey debate with eyes open and gloves off. That being said, and while I may differ with you over the definition of "conservative" and whether or not Sen. Chafee qualifies as one (and after a quick look around your website), there are some things on which you and I share common ground. I differ with Sen. Chafee on a variety of issues, whether fundamentally or by degree, but those differences on national or state issues don't always translate down to local issues (such as school and education policy). Please continue to stop by and take comments with a grain of salt, but keep in mind that some of the ideas you mentioned have been mentioned and refuted before. (As such, I would suggest that you read some past posts to get an idea of the ground that has been covered).
Wow!! It's almost like a battle with the Democrats. Any different view is instantly met with attacks. Whatever happened to a different view? Oh yeah, there is no room for disagreeing with someone or so it seems lately.
I stand by my post. Yes, I held a funraiser for Lincoln Chafee. Yes, I have been endorsed by Senator Chafee. I can say all that proudly. I believe in this good man and what he has done for Rhode Island. That's why I will do all I can to help him get re-elected. We need more people in Washington like him.
Anyone voting for Stephen Laffey won't know from day top day what they are going to get. He's all over the place. Just try to pin him down on an issue...then ask him next week about it.
I thought I would miss something being away at my junkmen's convention at Atlantic City. Instead we are getting the same losing arguments form the Chafee clowns.
Instead of blogging Greg should hold more fundraisers for Chafee, an incumbant loaning money to his campaign at this stage is ALWAYS a bad sign.
Instead of writing letters to the editor, Ian should come up with real Republican reasons why to vote for Chafee instead of being a little child making these old arguments. Cranston voters didn't buy this stuff, and neither are RI Republicans. Laffey is pro tax cuts, anti-pork spending, pro-Alito, pro-sanctions on Syria. Your guy is the opposite. All the other stuff doesn't matter to the overwhelming number of Republicans.
Chafee is so bad off with Republicans that Chafee himself has to admit he has to go after independents, because he is in deep trouble with Republicans. Guess what guys, the liberal independents are voting in the Democratic primaries...there are a whole bunch of them from top to bottom. I am so happy about that dumb West poll for that reason.
Maybe Ian should start writing the June press release saying how Chafee is becoming an indepedent but will caucus with Republicans so Republicans should vote for him. If he doesn't like that press release, he can start writing a press release for September saying how Chafee hasn't decided if he will vote for Laffey in November and that he reserves the right to write in himself.
This is so cute.
Hey greg, nice try. But we'll give you one shot. Go to electlaffey.com and see if you can see any policies there. I found them and it wasn't anything like where's waldo (chafee). Laffey has policies, and good ones too. You really are an amateur greggy.
Laffey doesn't have policies....HA. way too funny.
I think that we should all cut Greg a little slack, - he is currently pursuing his Rhode Island Real Estate license. No, really. His extended bio says so. He is attempting to join that esteemed fraternity of Real Estate salespeople. This is a very difficult endeavor that few with better things to to do have attempted.
Perhpas when he breaks away from his studies he can enlighten us all with his odious pearls of wisdom. But, then, the pursuit of that license can take all of three hours. I just can't wait!
I guess this is the great Chafee camp's offensive this morning, all these sudden posts between 9 and 9:15AM...about some rumor no one evr heard about before. What a waste of time.
When you have to rely on rumors you sound like the guys on rifuture.org...did you hear the rumor that whitehouse is dropping out,etc.
Here is the FACT that Republicans care about when it comes to taxes: Laffey is for ther Bush tax cuts, Chafee oppossed.
Here is the rumor that will become fact(if Chafee stays in the primary): Laffey wins 2 to 1.
Keep it going boys, you guys are funny. Rather have you doing this than actually working to get votes.
A few quick answers to johnb's comments:
"Greg is a Republican. He is active in his community and is an asset to the RIGOP."
- I never said he wasn't a Republican. I said he was a shill.
"Disagree all you want. Engage in debate and let the best man emerge. However, just because he disagrees with your candidate is no reason to label him a "shill." Since you support Mayor Laffey, does that make you a "shill", "hack", or "lap-dog"?"
- I prefer the term "lackey," especially since I'm only pretending to be a pro-growth, pro-life, pro-Alito, anti-pork conservative to set myself apart from your candidate. You ninny.
"I have felt for some time that the tone of this primary debate is hurting the Republican cause in this state. Nowhere is that more evident than now, when local candidates brave enough to step forward and identify themselves as Republicans are attacked for their support of a given candidate."
- No, the RIGOP is hurting the Republican cause in this state. Patricia "Cackles" Morgan and her old-guard cronies are what makes candidates reluctant to stick their necks out. Were you around when Morgan and Co. deceived the rank and file regarding the $500k from the RNC for Chafee? I and many others will never forget being lied to.
"The GOP needs to be a big tent. Let's not canabalize ourselves on a state-level for the sake of our national interests."
- I quote Christopher Adamo to remind you what "big tent" means:
"Among Ronald Reagan's most enduring legacies was his "Big Tent" approach to Republican Party politics. Standing firm in his driving principles, Reagan invited others to put aside their own petty philosophical differences and follow him, thereby sharing his overall vision for a strong and prosperous America. Thus he established himself as the most successful Republican President of the last half-century.
Unfortunately, once Reagan left office in 1989, prominent party operatives abandoned his ideology, proving that they did not comprehend the reasons for his success. In its place, they adopted a counterfeit "Big Tent", which has only served to undermine party successes and the conservative agenda ever since. This approach was epitomized by the 1996 candidacy of Bob Dole. According to Dole's version, the party would seek to incorporate every possible disparate viewpoint into its platform, with the intention of persuading as many people as possible that it concurred with their interests.
Bob Dole's defeat highlighted the consistently disastrous results of this approach. While Reagan's "Big Tent" was built on the concept of leadership, Dole's resulted from a vain attempt at following the crowd. And where Reagan's approach resulted in a general elevation of party standards to the level of his own, Dole reduced everyone to the lowest common denominator."
You could easily substitute "Chafee" for "Dole" and the message still rings true.
Chafee tries to be all things to all people, and thereby marginalizes himself in all that he does.
Hey all,
It looks like James, as in the James who had a mental breakdown a shortwhile ago is back. However, now he is calling himself Jim. Please DO NOT confuse him with me!
I am Jim, and my email is jim@4321.com.
James claimed to have the email jim@1234.com. I chastised him for trying to confuse people on this blog with his phony email. Shortly thereafter, I received an email from someone (who for now I will not name) asking me "Is this a real email address? - I just had to know." I responded, "Yes James, it really is".
Now I see a new Jim with an email address of jimemailwasfake@loser.com. I can only guess this is the James we all knew and loved busting on. Welcome back, James. I hope your rehabilitation was successful. Stick with your meds, for nothing has changed here. You will surely be tested.
Let me get this straight:
The Republican Party Officialdom wants us to support Chafee even though while (to us real conservative / Republicans) he may not exactly be our cup of tea, he is "the lesser of two evils" compared to a Democrat;
yet ...
they do not want us to support Laffey even though (to us real conservative / Republicans) he may not be exactly our cup of tea, he is "the lesser of two evils" compared to Chafee.
James(AKA Serano, Peter Jones,)
Tennessee has NO INCOME TAX, Chafee morons. There is nothing on the websites: WJAR channel 10, ProJo, chafee, NRSC about Laffey and taxes. You can't win with any facts so now you have to make things up, what losers.
James,the Chafee guy who flipped out, I know you have escaped from the hospital, but please stopping post under all these names like Serano, and Peter Jones. I suggest that the anchor rising editors take out an restraining order on you, you are filing up this blog with ravings of a lunatic...or at least delete them.
Well, looks like it's official. The Chafee camp is in dire straights. They have resorted to totally ignorant commentary on this blog and they have revealed their desperation by jumping on (and probably starting) this rumor about Laffey.
An incumbent with any chance of reelection does not need to go negative.
A candidate with a record of accomplishment and a solid message wouln't cower from debates.
The Chafee camp is showing its true colors, desperate and personal attacks, no ideas, no record to speak of afraid to take a stand on any issue, too chicken to debate.
OK, James. Time to check yourself back in.
Come on, Chafee staff, Senator. Please! The guy needs serious help. Somebody give him a ride back to Butler before he hurts himself in ALL CAPS again!
James (yes that means you too Serrano)
Cowards are Republicans who back Chafee instead of someone they agree with like Laffey...you know the guys who bossed you around during the campaign...well before they fired you and you went crazy.
I am happy though you are switching your vote to Matt Brown, you are one of many liberals, and you feel alot better about yourself now..don't you.
If you do live in Cranston, James, please provide your address so the Cranston police can come and pick you up. It's ok, your mommy still loves, and you just need some help.
>>TomW
whats the w stand for wart
im back baby james is home honey
heres jonny or james
No "James" ... for your purposes add a couple of lettersL it stands for "I warn't going to vote for Chafee before Laffey announced, and I warn't going to vote for Chafee no matter what!"
>>Peter. This is America. Abortion is a right. A freedom. A womans ability to make her own choice about her body. Move to a communist country. trust me you'll fit in. George
And tell us George, in your opinion, EXACTLY WHEN does the "fetus" "cross the Rubicon" and become a human being, with all the rights and privileges that (are supposed to) accompany that status?
Tom W,
Everyone knows that the fetus becomes a human being when they get their union card.
In RI this happens at around 26 weeks...coincidentally the same number of weeks that constitute a year's worth of work for a union teacher pulling down 75 large.
Why OZ, I think you're on to something!
Don't forget though that that 75 large doesn't include the value of benefits (easily another 15 large a year) AND more importantly PENSIONS.
I dare say that over a lifetime a public school / unionized teacher will get more dollars in pension benefits / retiree health than everything they made during their "working career."
Did you see the recent Wall Street Journal editorial highlighting NEA's "contibutions" to left-wing groups ... all funded from compulsory dues extracted from members (a number of whom are only in the union because they are forced to and aren't left-wingers)?
It's ironic that the ultra-liberal NEA supports abortion (it's an educational matter, you see) yet, were those babies not terminated, would have greatly increased the school age population, thus increasing the demand for teachers, thus generating even greater dues revenue for the NEA ...
Any chance of user-identification software?
This is getting ridiculous.
We're pretty "liberal" about our comments section, but there are limits to our magnanimous commenting policy. We allow pseudonyms, but there is no legitimate reason for the level of abuse seen in the comments section of this post.
"James" and "George Serrano", we have the ability to determine the IP from which you post comments. It appears that "James" posted from one location using the names "Jim," "Patty Morgan," "Peter Jones," "God" and...."George Serrano." And the "real" "George Serrano" posted from a different location and also used the names "Frank Savoy" and "laffeys the man". Hence, we had at least one person using two IP addresses (maybe two people...but who knows) generating needless commentary and attempting to have a fake "debate" based on baseless rumor and innuendo. Those comments have all been removed. The two suspect IPs have been banned. We will not remove the ability to comment on our posts, we just ask that you do so responsibly and act like adults. Thank you.
Marc,
Thank you for banning the lunatic(s).
MarK:
The post above Feb 18th at 10:03AM
"This topic has it's own section. By the way, why don't you guys grow up or go to another blog with your nonsense!..."
was not made by me.
Tough responses even mean ones are part of the game. Stupidity and outright lies should be removed.
Good job on the recent clean-up.
J Mahn
Marc:
Sorry about the MarK name mistake.
J Mahn
Marc, thank you for being flexible, but sensible - your action will help maintain the right balance of seriousness and fun in the ongoing debate(s).
Stretch
Thanks, Marc. Everything is looking a lot better now. Must be the full moon!
Joe Mahn: Thanks for pointing that out. Yes, it was from one of the two now-banned IPs. And no problem with the "k", I've been getting that my whole life. You should see what people do to my last name.......
All: Thanks for having the good sense to understand the necessity of the recent comment pruning.
Marc
Looks like James is back under the name Fighting Joe Hooker. Look at Chafee campaign responds to national review endorsement of Laffey.
Jess
Click here for the new Anchor Rising & Ocean State Current page
About Community Crier
About Engaged Citizen
Administrator
One more time:
Lang's limp defense of Chafee's lack of leadership, vision, and senatorial gravitas (not very well disguised as an attack) has the same garbage we have all discussed numerous times on this and other blogs for months.
Trying to convince Cranstonians of these lies is folly, while using them to pollute the broader national NRO audience should push people to do some research (www.electlaffey.com). Those who take the time to look into this slander will see it just as that.
Lang and his boss need to start the process of responding to the Laffey campaign's desire to put on a series of debates so the two men can face off publicly on all the issues. Taricani, Mulligan, Rappleye, Hummel, MacKay... where are you?
As I predicted months ago, Chafee, Lang, and the NRSC will stave this inevitable meeting off as long as they can. I doubt it, but sooner or later the clamber from the voters and the press could make it happen.
J Mahn
Posted by: Joe Mahn at February 16, 2006 12:05 PMIt's quite remarkable that the best Ian Lang and Chafee campaign can do is continue to harp on the fact the Laffey had to raise taxes in Cranston. Serious minds don't take kindly to ignorant and specious arguments.
Does Ian Lang and Chafee not realize that Laffey was re-elected 65%-35% in Democratic Cranston AFTER he raised taxes.
You might think that the Chafee campaign (and the NRSC, for that matter) would have a simple intellectual curiosity as to why that happened.
If the Chafee camp is just betting that the voters are just plain ignorant and don't understand what happened in Cranston they are in for a big suprise.
Posted by: Jim at February 16, 2006 12:32 PMClub for Growth Endorsement
National Review Endorsement
Steve Forbes Endorsement
Laffey is the ONLY Republican in this race!
Posted by: Larry Dallas at February 16, 2006 1:09 PMJust as Linc Chafee has tried to define what the term "Republican" means, this pathetic response in NRO is yet another deliberate effort by the Chafee campaign to try to redefine and mangle the word "conservative" to somehow include Chafee (and to not include Laffey). This is mainly because Laffey's base of support within the Republican Party tends to be center-right (like the national GOP), and Chafee's, well, tends to be in the other party altogether. It's a nice strategy, but not one that will ultimately work, as it isn't based in truth.
Laffey made the hard choices that he needed to make in order to save Cranston from financial ruin. He cut spending wherever he legally could and he had to bring revenue in line with expenditures. He didn't have the choice of running a deficit year after year like the federal government. Laffey has every right to be proud of his record of accomplishment, which is "conservative" in every sense of the word. As much as the Chafee folks might like it, he's not going to run away from that.
Chafee on the other hand, doesn't have a record of accomplishment. He has been a miserable failure as a US Senator. The only thing he seems to be "proud" of, is throwing more federal pork that we can't afford our way in a last ditch effort to buy Rhode Islanders' votes. He seems to believe that the only way he can get ahead is by trying to mischaracterize the accomplishments of his opponent. It will fail.
Posted by: Will at February 16, 2006 1:24 PMAs I sit here at the beach and watch the waves roll in...I must say it and I don't like to say this, because of his father, ....but say it I will.
And I will say it and only say it once...
Lincoln Chaffee is the worst U.S. Senator in the Country. Out of 100 he is last.
Posted by: Mr. Bergman at February 16, 2006 5:20 PMSay what you will about Chafee, but Laffey is unelectable. He'd get crushed in a RI general election and I will not be part of a movement that causes us to lose our Republican seat in Congress. If Chafee loses that seat, it will remain with the Democrats for 30 years. It's time for the people on this page to wise up and support a WINNER.
Posted by: Vince Crandall at February 16, 2006 5:57 PMWhateverrrrrrr.
Posted by: ballottra at February 16, 2006 8:28 PM>>Say what you will about Chafee, but Laffey is unelectable. He'd get crushed in a RI general election and I will not be part of a movement that causes us to lose our Republican seat in Congress. If Chafee loses that seat, it will remain with the Democrats for 30 years. It's time for the people on this page to wise up and support a WINNER.
We lost "our Republican seat in Congress" the day Linc arrived.
Posted by: Tom W at February 16, 2006 9:05 PMIf we must choose between adherence to Republican principles and potentially trading in what is now a virtual Democratic Senate seat for the real thing, I'll take principle anytime. At least I'll be able to look at myself in the mirror and be proud to have tried. It's worth the risk.
Posted by: Will at February 16, 2006 9:41 PMActually, Senator Chafee is a true Republican in the classic sense. These values include:
-Supporting an engaged foreign policy and a strong national defense;
-Continuing the Party's recognition that government does have a role to play in protecting our environment; and
-Respecting the individual as evidenced by limiting government interference in their lives.
I think it's a shame that our party has been "hijacked" by the extreme right. The reasons for the foundation of the Republican party have been twisted out of shape.
Just look at the out of control spending by this administration and congress. If we operated a company like this we would be in jail.
I would suggest that if more politicians were as responsible as Lincoln Chafee, we would be better off as a nation.
Posted by: Greg Nedwetzky at February 17, 2006 8:01 AMGreg, if you think the current GOP has moved to the Right of classic Republicanism, and that Chaffee represents the true and original ideals of the party, you're either very young, or...there's some other, less charitable explanation. Because that is, not to put too fine a point on it, totally whack.
Posted by: ballottra at February 17, 2006 9:54 AMGreg:
On your points...
-Chafee is against the war on terror
-His vote to give billions $$$ to Oil Cos. is anti evnvironment
-Chafee Voted against Tax Cuts and Voted for Earmark/Pork spending along with current congress.
You are out of touch with reality or worse, a lying propagandist. Either way you are wrong.
Chafee is the problem not the solution.
Laffey is the only true republican in this race.
J Mahn
Posted by: Joe Mahn at February 17, 2006 9:57 AM>>Respecting the individual as evidenced by limiting government interference in their lives.
>>I think it's a shame that our party has been "hijacked" by the extreme right. The reasons for the foundation of the Republican party have been twisted out of shape.
>Just look at the out of control spending by this administration and congress. If we operated a company like this we would be in jail.
"Extreme right" gives away where Greg is coming from.
"Government interference" is a cute euphemism for Chafee's support of abortion - killing one unborn human being so as not to "interfere" with another is, to Chafee, "just ducky."
The "out of control" spending is a legitimate criticism - except that Chafee's answer is to raise taxes, not cut spending.
And not to let the Republicans in Congress off the hook, but (as here in RI) the biggest drivers of spending are government employee pay / benefits and WELFARE (Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid). And we all know what the Democrats (including Chafee) will do and say if the Republicans attempt to cut WELFARE.
So (again, not letting them off the hook, particulary as regards earmarks) the Republicans have done what they can - cut tax rates - while leaving spending on its trajectory so as not to incur the Democrat-driven wrath of "seniors" and other welfare beneficiaries.
Posted by: Tom W at February 17, 2006 11:26 AMGreg is yet another Chafee shill, but one with a self-serving plan:
1. Throw a fundraiser for Chafee
http://www.gregnedwetzky.org/events.htm
2. Get an endorsement (after the checks clear, of course)
http://www.gregnedwetzky.org/ch_endorse.swf
3. Hit the blogs to paint his mealticket as a "True Republican."
Nice try, rookie.
Posted by: oz at February 17, 2006 12:00 PMOz,
Greg is a Republican. He is active in his community and is an asset to the RIGOP.
Disagree all you want. Engage in debate and let the best man emerge. However, just because he disagrees with your candidate is no reason to label him a "shill." Since you support Mayor Laffey, does that make you a "shill", "hack", or "lap-dog"?
I have felt for some time that the tone of this primary debate is hurting the Republican cause in this state. Nowhere is that more evident than now, when local candidates brave enough to step forward and identify themselves as Republicans are attacked for their support of a given candidate.
The GOP needs to be a big tent. Let's not canabalize ourselves on a state-level for the sake of our national interests.
Posted by: johnb at February 17, 2006 12:24 PMCan't wait till sept 12, Laffey crushes Chafee. Crush Crush Crush. Yeee Haaa. Crush. I mean it is almost too funny. Have fun guys....CRUSH
Posted by: Master at February 17, 2006 2:58 PMMr. Nedwetzky,
Posted by: Marc Comtois at February 17, 2006 3:12 PMLet me second what "johnb" said, but with the caveat that one should enter the Chafee/Laffey debate with eyes open and gloves off. That being said, and while I may differ with you over the definition of "conservative" and whether or not Sen. Chafee qualifies as one (and after a quick look around your website), there are some things on which you and I share common ground. I differ with Sen. Chafee on a variety of issues, whether fundamentally or by degree, but those differences on national or state issues don't always translate down to local issues (such as school and education policy). Please continue to stop by and take comments with a grain of salt, but keep in mind that some of the ideas you mentioned have been mentioned and refuted before. (As such, I would suggest that you read some past posts to get an idea of the ground that has been covered).
Wow!! It's almost like a battle with the Democrats. Any different view is instantly met with attacks. Whatever happened to a different view? Oh yeah, there is no room for disagreeing with someone or so it seems lately.
I stand by my post. Yes, I held a funraiser for Lincoln Chafee. Yes, I have been endorsed by Senator Chafee. I can say all that proudly. I believe in this good man and what he has done for Rhode Island. That's why I will do all I can to help him get re-elected. We need more people in Washington like him.
Anyone voting for Stephen Laffey won't know from day top day what they are going to get. He's all over the place. Just try to pin him down on an issue...then ask him next week about it.
Posted by: Greg Nedwetzky at February 17, 2006 4:05 PMI thought I would miss something being away at my junkmen's convention at Atlantic City. Instead we are getting the same losing arguments form the Chafee clowns.
Instead of blogging Greg should hold more fundraisers for Chafee, an incumbant loaning money to his campaign at this stage is ALWAYS a bad sign.
Instead of writing letters to the editor, Ian should come up with real Republican reasons why to vote for Chafee instead of being a little child making these old arguments. Cranston voters didn't buy this stuff, and neither are RI Republicans. Laffey is pro tax cuts, anti-pork spending, pro-Alito, pro-sanctions on Syria. Your guy is the opposite. All the other stuff doesn't matter to the overwhelming number of Republicans.
Chafee is so bad off with Republicans that Chafee himself has to admit he has to go after independents, because he is in deep trouble with Republicans. Guess what guys, the liberal independents are voting in the Democratic primaries...there are a whole bunch of them from top to bottom. I am so happy about that dumb West poll for that reason.
Maybe Ian should start writing the June press release saying how Chafee is becoming an indepedent but will caucus with Republicans so Republicans should vote for him. If he doesn't like that press release, he can start writing a press release for September saying how Chafee hasn't decided if he will vote for Laffey in November and that he reserves the right to write in himself.
This is so cute.
Posted by: Fred Sanford at February 17, 2006 6:10 PMHey greg, nice try. But we'll give you one shot. Go to electlaffey.com and see if you can see any policies there. I found them and it wasn't anything like where's waldo (chafee). Laffey has policies, and good ones too. You really are an amateur greggy.
Laffey doesn't have policies....HA. way too funny.
Posted by: Peter the man at February 17, 2006 6:35 PMI think that we should all cut Greg a little slack, - he is currently pursuing his Rhode Island Real Estate license. No, really. His extended bio says so. He is attempting to join that esteemed fraternity of Real Estate salespeople. This is a very difficult endeavor that few with better things to to do have attempted.
Perhpas when he breaks away from his studies he can enlighten us all with his odious pearls of wisdom. But, then, the pursuit of that license can take all of three hours. I just can't wait!
Posted by: Aztec at February 17, 2006 9:07 PMI guess this is the great Chafee camp's offensive this morning, all these sudden posts between 9 and 9:15AM...about some rumor no one evr heard about before. What a waste of time.
When you have to rely on rumors you sound like the guys on rifuture.org...did you hear the rumor that whitehouse is dropping out,etc.
Here is the FACT that Republicans care about when it comes to taxes: Laffey is for ther Bush tax cuts, Chafee oppossed.
Here is the rumor that will become fact(if Chafee stays in the primary): Laffey wins 2 to 1.
Keep it going boys, you guys are funny. Rather have you doing this than actually working to get votes.
Posted by: Fred Sanford at February 18, 2006 9:26 AMA few quick answers to johnb's comments:
"Greg is a Republican. He is active in his community and is an asset to the RIGOP."
- I never said he wasn't a Republican. I said he was a shill.
"Disagree all you want. Engage in debate and let the best man emerge. However, just because he disagrees with your candidate is no reason to label him a "shill." Since you support Mayor Laffey, does that make you a "shill", "hack", or "lap-dog"?"
- I prefer the term "lackey," especially since I'm only pretending to be a pro-growth, pro-life, pro-Alito, anti-pork conservative to set myself apart from your candidate. You ninny.
"I have felt for some time that the tone of this primary debate is hurting the Republican cause in this state. Nowhere is that more evident than now, when local candidates brave enough to step forward and identify themselves as Republicans are attacked for their support of a given candidate."
- No, the RIGOP is hurting the Republican cause in this state. Patricia "Cackles" Morgan and her old-guard cronies are what makes candidates reluctant to stick their necks out. Were you around when Morgan and Co. deceived the rank and file regarding the $500k from the RNC for Chafee? I and many others will never forget being lied to.
"The GOP needs to be a big tent. Let's not canabalize ourselves on a state-level for the sake of our national interests."
- I quote Christopher Adamo to remind you what "big tent" means:
"Among Ronald Reagan's most enduring legacies was his "Big Tent" approach to Republican Party politics. Standing firm in his driving principles, Reagan invited others to put aside their own petty philosophical differences and follow him, thereby sharing his overall vision for a strong and prosperous America. Thus he established himself as the most successful Republican President of the last half-century.
Unfortunately, once Reagan left office in 1989, prominent party operatives abandoned his ideology, proving that they did not comprehend the reasons for his success. In its place, they adopted a counterfeit "Big Tent", which has only served to undermine party successes and the conservative agenda ever since. This approach was epitomized by the 1996 candidacy of Bob Dole. According to Dole's version, the party would seek to incorporate every possible disparate viewpoint into its platform, with the intention of persuading as many people as possible that it concurred with their interests.
Bob Dole's defeat highlighted the consistently disastrous results of this approach. While Reagan's "Big Tent" was built on the concept of leadership, Dole's resulted from a vain attempt at following the crowd. And where Reagan's approach resulted in a general elevation of party standards to the level of his own, Dole reduced everyone to the lowest common denominator."
You could easily substitute "Chafee" for "Dole" and the message still rings true.
Chafee tries to be all things to all people, and thereby marginalizes himself in all that he does.
Posted by: oz at February 18, 2006 10:18 AMHey all,
It looks like James, as in the James who had a mental breakdown a shortwhile ago is back. However, now he is calling himself Jim. Please DO NOT confuse him with me!
I am Jim, and my email is jim@4321.com.
James claimed to have the email jim@1234.com. I chastised him for trying to confuse people on this blog with his phony email. Shortly thereafter, I received an email from someone (who for now I will not name) asking me "Is this a real email address? - I just had to know." I responded, "Yes James, it really is".
Posted by: Jim at February 18, 2006 11:07 AMNow I see a new Jim with an email address of jimemailwasfake@loser.com. I can only guess this is the James we all knew and loved busting on. Welcome back, James. I hope your rehabilitation was successful. Stick with your meds, for nothing has changed here. You will surely be tested.
Let me get this straight:
The Republican Party Officialdom wants us to support Chafee even though while (to us real conservative / Republicans) he may not exactly be our cup of tea, he is "the lesser of two evils" compared to a Democrat;
yet ...
they do not want us to support Laffey even though (to us real conservative / Republicans) he may not be exactly our cup of tea, he is "the lesser of two evils" compared to Chafee.
Posted by: Tom W at February 18, 2006 1:22 PMJames(AKA Serano, Peter Jones,)
Tennessee has NO INCOME TAX, Chafee morons. There is nothing on the websites: WJAR channel 10, ProJo, chafee, NRSC about Laffey and taxes. You can't win with any facts so now you have to make things up, what losers.
James,the Chafee guy who flipped out, I know you have escaped from the hospital, but please stopping post under all these names like Serano, and Peter Jones. I suggest that the anchor rising editors take out an restraining order on you, you are filing up this blog with ravings of a lunatic...or at least delete them.
Posted by: Fred Sanford at February 18, 2006 1:54 PMWell, looks like it's official. The Chafee camp is in dire straights. They have resorted to totally ignorant commentary on this blog and they have revealed their desperation by jumping on (and probably starting) this rumor about Laffey.
An incumbent with any chance of reelection does not need to go negative.
A candidate with a record of accomplishment and a solid message wouln't cower from debates.
The Chafee camp is showing its true colors, desperate and personal attacks, no ideas, no record to speak of afraid to take a stand on any issue, too chicken to debate.
Posted by: Stretch Cunningham at February 18, 2006 2:52 PMOK, James. Time to check yourself back in.
Come on, Chafee staff, Senator. Please! The guy needs serious help. Somebody give him a ride back to Butler before he hurts himself in ALL CAPS again!
Posted by: Stretch Cunningham at February 18, 2006 3:18 PMJames (yes that means you too Serrano)
Cowards are Republicans who back Chafee instead of someone they agree with like Laffey...you know the guys who bossed you around during the campaign...well before they fired you and you went crazy.
I am happy though you are switching your vote to Matt Brown, you are one of many liberals, and you feel alot better about yourself now..don't you.
If you do live in Cranston, James, please provide your address so the Cranston police can come and pick you up. It's ok, your mommy still loves, and you just need some help.
Posted by: Fred Sanford at February 18, 2006 3:39 PM>>TomW
whats the w stand for wart
im back baby james is home honey
heres jonny or james
No "James" ... for your purposes add a couple of lettersL it stands for "I warn't going to vote for Chafee before Laffey announced, and I warn't going to vote for Chafee no matter what!"
Posted by: Tom W at February 18, 2006 7:05 PM>>Peter. This is America. Abortion is a right. A freedom. A womans ability to make her own choice about her body. Move to a communist country. trust me you'll fit in. George
And tell us George, in your opinion, EXACTLY WHEN does the "fetus" "cross the Rubicon" and become a human being, with all the rights and privileges that (are supposed to) accompany that status?
Posted by: Tom W at February 18, 2006 7:07 PMTom W,
Everyone knows that the fetus becomes a human being when they get their union card.
In RI this happens at around 26 weeks...coincidentally the same number of weeks that constitute a year's worth of work for a union teacher pulling down 75 large.
Posted by: oz at February 18, 2006 8:08 PMWhy OZ, I think you're on to something!
Don't forget though that that 75 large doesn't include the value of benefits (easily another 15 large a year) AND more importantly PENSIONS.
I dare say that over a lifetime a public school / unionized teacher will get more dollars in pension benefits / retiree health than everything they made during their "working career."
Did you see the recent Wall Street Journal editorial highlighting NEA's "contibutions" to left-wing groups ... all funded from compulsory dues extracted from members (a number of whom are only in the union because they are forced to and aren't left-wingers)?
It's ironic that the ultra-liberal NEA supports abortion (it's an educational matter, you see) yet, were those babies not terminated, would have greatly increased the school age population, thus increasing the demand for teachers, thus generating even greater dues revenue for the NEA ...
Posted by: Tom W at February 18, 2006 10:25 PMAny chance of user-identification software?
This is getting ridiculous.
Posted by: johnb at February 19, 2006 1:37 AMWe're pretty "liberal" about our comments section, but there are limits to our magnanimous commenting policy. We allow pseudonyms, but there is no legitimate reason for the level of abuse seen in the comments section of this post.
"James" and "George Serrano", we have the ability to determine the IP from which you post comments. It appears that "James" posted from one location using the names "Jim," "Patty Morgan," "Peter Jones," "God" and...."George Serrano." And the "real" "George Serrano" posted from a different location and also used the names "Frank Savoy" and "laffeys the man". Hence, we had at least one person using two IP addresses (maybe two people...but who knows) generating needless commentary and attempting to have a fake "debate" based on baseless rumor and innuendo. Those comments have all been removed. The two suspect IPs have been banned. We will not remove the ability to comment on our posts, we just ask that you do so responsibly and act like adults. Thank you.
Posted by: Marc Comtois at February 19, 2006 8:59 AMMarc,
Thank you for banning the lunatic(s).
Posted by: oz at February 19, 2006 11:50 AMMarK:
The post above Feb 18th at 10:03AM
"This topic has it's own section. By the way, why don't you guys grow up or go to another blog with your nonsense!..."
was not made by me.
Tough responses even mean ones are part of the game. Stupidity and outright lies should be removed.
Good job on the recent clean-up.
J Mahn
Posted by: Joe Mahn at February 19, 2006 12:36 PMMarc:
Sorry about the MarK name mistake.
J Mahn
Posted by: Joe Mahn at February 19, 2006 12:37 PMMarc, thank you for being flexible, but sensible - your action will help maintain the right balance of seriousness and fun in the ongoing debate(s).
Stretch
Posted by: Stretch Cunningham at February 19, 2006 1:08 PMThanks, Marc. Everything is looking a lot better now. Must be the full moon!
Posted by: Will at February 19, 2006 4:17 PMJoe Mahn: Thanks for pointing that out. Yes, it was from one of the two now-banned IPs. And no problem with the "k", I've been getting that my whole life. You should see what people do to my last name.......
All: Thanks for having the good sense to understand the necessity of the recent comment pruning.
Posted by: Marc Comtois at February 19, 2006 7:07 PMMarc
Looks like James is back under the name Fighting Joe Hooker. Look at Chafee campaign responds to national review endorsement of Laffey.
Jess
Posted by: Jesse Ventura at February 20, 2006 8:03 AM