May 5, 2008

MTA calls recall against Dillon ‘Recall Abuse’

The Michigan Townships Association (MTA) called the attempted recall of Michigan House Speaker Andy Dillon, D-Redford Township, recall abuse.

In its weekly Legislative Report, the bipartisan MTA headlined the brief that goes to elected officials across the state “recall abuse spreads to state level.” “As so many township officials have experienced in the past, the recall is not based upon improper actions, but instead they are accused of making a tough decision on a critical issue.” As a reporter who coved local government, I saw lots of failed recall attempts launched because someone did not like a vote, but during election time when you should recall an elected official for a vote you do not agree with, you get less than 50 percent voter turnout.

Republican Macomb County Commissioner Leon Drolet and company launched a recall against 10 state Legislators who voted for the increase of the income tax - and the since repealed sales tax on some services - that avoided a government shutdown and helped balanced the state budget on Oct. 1. After the other nine recall attempts fell by the wayside, Drolet concentrated on just the recall attempt against Dillon by using illegal tactics and lying to get signatures.

According to the MTA, “Speaker Dillon is facing a recall for his vote to raise taxes. The Speaker is also charging recall organizers with lying to the citizens in order to procure signatures, a common complaint amongst township officials facing recall from office. “

The Michigan Townships Association promotes the interests of 1,242 townships and their elected officials.


Anonymous said...

Of course they would, politicians protecting politicians

Communications guru said...

Nice try dismissing this, who-ever-you-are, but the MTA are not just elected officials. The simple fact is that the majority of Michigan voters see the fraud, and they see this recall as what it is, an illegal attempt to undue the will of the voters.

Anonymous said...

So according to you no one can ever be recalled because it will "undue the will of the voters".

So be it, I can understand why a Liberal would want this, because so many democrats would have an issue with this.

There is so much fraud perpetrated against the citizens of Michigan by the politicians it would take me days to write it all down.

The reason they had to raise taxes is because the government puts their hands into everything and everything costs money.

There are too many programs run by incompetent government employees. Our government on the state and federal level is just too large.

Republican Michigander said...

Here's a civics 101 lesson for you kevin s. It's called checks and balances.

I have no problem with recalls. None. I thought they were good until the political class went batty over them. Now I think they are great. What these do is wake up politicians so they can start thinking that people are actually watching their votes. Despite what the elites trying to equate recalls for the same types of reasons for impeachments (which is what expulsion is for), the reality is that recalls are there for whatever the citizens, not the media, decides is the reason. There already is president for recalls over tax increases. 1984 and that Blanchard increase for starters.

The only negative thing I have to say about the Dillon recall is that I thought Schauer should have been targeted instead since Dillon was already up for election in 08. Having that weasel Schauer worried about his own job while trying to take Walberg's would have been even better.

As far as the township association goes, of course they are against the recall. So what. They benefit from higher taxes. We don't.

Brett said...

If this recall is illegal, why hasn't anyone been prosecuted yet? I'm all for any recall attempt. If a politician runs on one thing, then turns around and does the opposite of what he/she was elected to do, the recall is the best and really only option.

It's interesting that the peitioners gathered over 15,000 votes. They only needed just under 9,000. So I guess my next question would be, what is your source for saying that the "majority" of voters are against it?

It's also interesting to note that a press conference was scheduled a month ago for last Thursday. At the last minute, they were told that they couldn't hold the press conference as scheduled in the room that it was scheduled to be. So the press conference was moved outside the capitol on the grounds. Reporters, after the press conference, then went to Speaker Dillon and asked him why they reneged on the scheduled room. Dillon said, ' not in my room'.

This tells me that Dillon was the right one to recall. That room is not his. It belongs to the people of the State of Michigan. By the way, before any of the liberals decide to call it Dillon's office, it wasn't his office that the conference was scheduled to be in. It was a conference room. Dillon exerted his POWER to take the room from the PEOPLE just because he had the POWER.

So much more in your initial blog is faulty, it would take forever to set straight all of the "errors".


Communications guru said...

Here’s a civics lesson for you. We have a check and balance in place, it’s called an election. The politician must defend their record every 2-4 years when turnout is the highest and everyone is paying attention. Like the MTA says, a recall should be reserved for when an elected official does something wrong.
The design of this recall is to undo the election because Republicans can’t beat Andy Dillon in a general election. Dillon and his thugs did every thing they could to get this on the ballot, including forgery signatures, lying to get signatures and using illegal petition gathers. You know the turnout for recall elections are low with only the angry people coming out to vote, and right now no one, no matter what party they are from, is going to vote to allow a politician to keep their job.
Exactly what “elites” are you talking about? Republicans have a funny definition of an elite.
What happened to the other recalls? I wouldn’t call 1 out of 9 a very good success rate.
There is no reason to recall Mark Schauer. It’s funny, the Republicans didn’t have the balls to do what was needed to balance the budget, but they had no problem voting to spend that money.
Townships benefit from high taxes? It’s pretty clear why they are against them if you read the brief. Are you saying you don’t benefit from the services townships provide? Hopefully you will never need the Green Oak Township police.

Communications guru said...

Because the court proceedings are just getting started. If”…a politician runs on one thing, then turns around and does the opposite of what he/she was elected to d.” then you vote for his opponent in the election. This is an illegal attempt to undo the election because Republicans can’t beat Dillon in a general election.
They never collected 15,000 signatures, all we have is Drolet’s word that happened, and after seeing the illegal things he has done in this recall farce, that isn’t worth shit.
If there was this grassroots movement to recall Andy Dillon they would have raised more than $5 bucks from the 17th District. They did not get anywhere near 9,000 legal signatures.
Good for Andy Dillion to kick Drolet and his thugs out. That’s his right as the Speaker. Dillion has been more than fair to the House Republicans. He set the allotment for each office, both Republican and Democrat, the same, meaning they both have the same amount of staff in each member’s office. It’s not the same in the Senate.
You are more than welcome to try and punch holes in the more than 500 other posts on my blog, but you can’t.

Communications guru said...

I never, ever said “no one can ever be recalled.” I said they should be recalled for doing something illegal or unethical. The Mayor of Detroit is a perfect example of a reason to launch a recall; recalling someone for one vote you don’t like is not a reason for a recall. Vote for his opponent in August or November.
It’s a whole lot more than just liberals that have a problem with this recall. There’s former Republican Speaker of the House Rick Johnson, for one (
I agree with you, who-ever-you-are, that government has been grown, at least on the federal level, especially under big government Republicans. Bush has grown government so large he took a budget surplus and turned it into one of the largest deficits ever.
State government has shrunk. In fact, we had more state employees in 1973 than we have now, despite quite a few more residents.
Under former Republican Gov. Bill Milliken we had 52,673 state employees. In 2000 under former Republican Gov. John Engler there were 61,493 state employees. In 2006 there were only 52,255 employees. Does than make Engler a big government advocate?
Government employees, especially state employees, are far from incompetent. They are doing more with less.

Republican Michigander said...

Kevin says """Here’s a civics lesson for you. We have a check and balance in place, it’s called an election.""

And that's what a recall is, an election.

""The politician must defend their record every 2-4 years when turnout is the highest and everyone is paying attention.""

Voters should always pay attention. That's their duty.

""Like the MTA says, a recall should be reserved for when an elected official does something wrong."""

He did do something wrong. He raised taxes in a bad economy when we can not afford it. This LEGAL recall holds him accountable.

""The design of this recall is to undo the election""

How the hell do you undo an election with an election?

""because Republicans can’t beat Andy Dillon in a general election.""

That remains to be seen.

"Hopefully you will never need the Green Oak Township police."

I have a .45. That does the job.

Republican Michigander said...

"""There’s former Republican Speaker of the House Rick Johnson, for one (
I agree with you, who-ever-"""

Rick Johnson? He (and Ken Sikkema) were as big of a problem as Granholm when it comes to fiscal irresponsibility, and that takes work. Of course they are against a recall.

Brett said...

It's not illegal to try to recall someone because one can't beat the other in an election. It's just unlikely that that sort of a recall would get very far.

The fact is that recalls are constitutional, which rules out your "Illegal to undo an election'.

Second, You have yet to prove that anyone from outside the district has been gathering signatures. In fact, Rose Bogaert is credited with raising most of the signatures and is the name most often mentioned by Drolet as well as the newspapers. Mrs. Bogaert is a resident of Dillons district. If there is someone gathering signatures that is from outside the district, please inform me who that might be.

Third, I'm not much interested in reviewing all of your past posts. I've read three of them and I'm less than impressed with the comments section.

You complain about someone being anonymous, yet you offer that option to people. Anonymous could very well be a female and if so, I would advise her not to give her name. With some of your comments, I'm not sure I'd trust you to have her name for her own personal safety from harassment outside this forum.

It's really too bad that you can't deal with the issues rather than personally attacking anyone that disagrees with you or asks you to back up your assertions with some sources, facts or even a coherent opinion.

You may "FEEL" something is illegal, but that doesn't make it illegal. Please submit proof rather than the party line.

I don't believe that you've ever been a journalist. Your sentence structure is poor, your spelling....well, I'll attribute that to typing fast and not reviewing your spelling since I do that at times as well.

I would like to see some documentation that you were in fact a journalist. I don't recognize the name "communication guru" from any media that I've ever read or listened. Saying you are something is not credibility without any proof.

You didn't ask my advice, so I doubt you'll take it, but if you're going to have a comment section open to all, you might want to argue the issues rather than namecalling and using foul language. If you can't do that, then I'd suggest you open it only to the ones with the same opinions as you, but you'd probably have to make a note section on the side saying "comments from liberals are accepted, but I'm not tolerant of conservative voices."


Communications guru said...

Right, right. You don’t like Republicioans Johnson and Sikkema because they are bad Republicans. Don’t forget Chris Ward and Richard Ball, they stood by Dillon last week.

I know you’re not the sharpest knife in the drawer, but surely you know the difference between a recall election and a regular election? Sorry, he did his job, like many other lawmakers did; hence, the illegal and unethical recall that’s trying to undue the will of the voters.

Of course you can’t beat Andy Dillon in a general election, that’s why you are trying this.
Wow, you have a .45, you are so macho. Maybe you can fix the roads, put out a fire, treat the water, treat the sewer or pay for the many other necessary services government provides with that .45.

Brett said...

My Senator is Patti Birkholz. She's a Republican. I voted for her the last time she was up for re-election. She went against her conservative principles and voted for one of the tax hikes.

I am all for recalling her. She will not get my vote if she runs again. In fact, I will work to get a true conservative to run against her.

If there is a recall against her, I will sign my name big and bold. It's not a party issue with me. It's an idealogy. When my elected rep votes against what she says she stands for, she takes my vote and makes it garbage.

If you will recall (no pun intended) in 2006, there were just two incumbents that were beat out in their primaries. One was Cynthia McKinney down in Georgia. The other was Joe Schwarz in this area.

I voted for Schwarz in 2004. He ran as a conservative, but voted as a liberal. He was voted out and we now have Tim Wahlberg. If there had been a recall against Schwarz, I'd have signed that and I don't care if the recall election comes up 1 day before the election. If he doesn't do as he runs, I'm all for having him thrown out.

So don't even try the "recall to get your own guy in when you couldn't win in the general election".

If you vote for party, you'll have to compromise your beliefs for the betterment of the party. If you vote your idealogy, you're voting your beliefs and the R or D after the name won't mean a thing.

You seem to be saying 'my party, do or die' rather than 'I want a guy that votes in my interest'.


Communications guru said...

Well, “Brett,” The illegal part comes when you forge signatures, lie to get them and use illegal petition gathers. Drolet has already admitted people from outside the district collected signatures when he got caught, but he claims they were just walking with the petition gathers. Right.

Yes, I give people the option to post anonymously. Unlike the leading Republican blog, I don’t bar people when I don’t like hat thy write. I give them the option of identifying themselves, but most are cowards.

As for insults, I only give what I receive.

I really could care less what you think of my journalistic ability, and my sentence structure is fine, themselves. I don’t have to prove anything to anyone, especially to some guy going by the name of Brett.

I am arguing the issues. It’s kind of sad that because you can’t win a debate you claim I am just name-calling and using foul language. I guess you have never heard the word shit before. Unlike rightwing blogs, anyone can post a comment here.

Brett said...

Once again, please prove the "forged signatures".

You give people the option of naming themselves, as well as to be anonymous, then call them cowards. Interesting way to encourage people to join your discussion. Yet, you then imply that my name is not "Brett". You have my blog site, where I'm very upfront with my name and my E-mail address.

Again, you are beligerant, and offer no sources for your assertions.

I haven't learned much here but you're entertaining anyway.


A guy going by the name of Brett

Communications guru said...

Patty Birkholz is term-limited, so a recall makes no sense. I find few things I agree with her on, but she is smart enough and professional enough to understand you have to work with the other side to accomplish anything. Again, only a few brave Republicans voted for what had to be done, but their cowardly Republican colleagues had no problem spending that money. Plus, she voted for the income tax increase, that’s singular.

You are more than welcome to start a recall against her, but we know Drolet and company were only after Democrats. The Ed Gaffney recall was a token one that never got out of the discussion stage. A recall against someone for making a vote is wrong and just intimidation.

I call them cowards because they throw accusations around; like that I abuse drugs and alcohol, and then hide behind anonymity. If they want to express an anonymous opinion on an issue, fine, but someone who makes those kinds of accusations and refuses to, at the very least, choose something to identify who to respond to is a coward. Sorry, “brett,” but I don’t have your blog or profile. I can link to Republican Michigander’s profile by clicking on his name, but not yours.

Well, I vote for a party because the Democratic Party reflects the majority of my views. I don’t agree with it 100 percent, but I disagree with Republicans almost 100 percent. It’s a pretty narrow party. I also understand how politics work, and the party that controls the Legislature can accomplish things. Just look what the Republicans have done to the Michigan Senate as proof.

I don’t know much about Cynthia McKinney, but I do know a little about Joe Schwarz. To say he ran as a conservative is simply not true, and to call him liberal is also not true. The right-wing Club for Growth pumped thousands of dollars into that race, so there is no way Schwarz ran as a conservative. Plus, he had a moderate voting record in the U.S. House and Michigan Senate.

Sorry the recall is a way to undue the election because you could not win in the general election. I suggest you find out how a recall election works before you make that ridiculous claim again.

The Democrats reflect my views, and they are better for the country and state.

Brett said...

You're right. Birkholz is term limited. However, a recall is sensible. In her two years left, she could do much damage. To remove her now would prevent some of the silly legislation that she could put forth.

It's interesting that you say you "know" that Drolet was only about removing Democrats. He had a couple of Republicans on his list. Apparently, there was not enough support in those areas to remove them. After all, Drolet can't do it because he's not in their districts. However, there is nothing wrong with him organizing a recall where there is a desire for a recall by the citizens of that district, as it was in Dillon's district.

Schwarz ran as a tax cutter, and pro-family. After election, he backed each tax increase proposed and fought the gay marriage ban which the people of Michigan voted for. He lost in the primary in 06. His replacement ran as a conservative and was elected and has acted conservative while in office. He'll get my vote in the fall.

So what's happened to Schwarz? He acted the sore loser and gave up his Republican membership. He'll not be missed.

The Democrats are all about "gimme gimme gimme". That's not good for the state, nor the country. Granholm is a perfect example of that. She took over a state that had a 3.9% unemployment rate. In her five years on the job, she's boosted that to 7.2% currently, chased jobs out of the state and through all of her chest thumping about new jobs, Michigan is losing jobs at an ever increasing rate.

Vote Democrat and you get higher taxes, stifling regulation and higher spending by a bloated government.

Vote Republican and you get lower taxes, a thriving economy. My one disappointment in the Republicans is that they spent like Democrats and lost their majority in 2006 due to that.

I have no doubt you'll disagree, but I don't care. The facts are indisputable.

On another note, it's interesting that you use "The Conservative Media" to draw people to your site when you're not conservative. Good move. My blog is The Conservative Lifestyle. But then, I am Conservative.

I'm drawn in though. If Michigan does have a revote (Democrats always seem to have to do it two or three times to try to get it right), I'll be voting for Hillary. Not to have her elected President, but because I believe the liberal John McCain has a better chance of beating the liberal Hillary Clinton.



Communications guru said...

A recall does not make sense for Birkholtz. To me, a recall, and most people seem to hold that opinion too, should be for doing something illegal or unethical in office, not for a vote you don’t agree with.

Yes, I know Drolet was only about removing Democrats. Again, Ed Gaffney was the only Republican even mentioned, but they didn't even bother filing language. There was not enough support in Andy Dillon’s district for a recall, but that did not stop Drolet. Drolet does not live in Dillon’s district either, but that did not stop him either.

Well, Joe Schwarz is not the only Republican leaving the party. The “Democrats are all about "gimme gimme gimme.” How ridiculous. I’ll make the same bet with you that I make with all the other conservatives who attack me here and who are blinded by their narrow ideology to the facts. I’ll bet you know at least one family member or friend who has a better life because of a liberal program.

Nice lie with the unemployment statistics, but the fact is when the Gov. Granholm took office, the unemployment rate stood at 6.2 percent, not 3.9, according to the Bureau of Labor Stats. Beside, how can you blame a governor, any governor, for the big 3 losing market share and off shoring? It’s also a fact governors do not have a huge effect on the economy because they have nothing to do with monetary policy and trade policy.

It’s the Republicans who stand for bloated government. It seen ironic that Republicans say they hate government, but they cheat so much to take control of it. As I wrote in a previous comment, Bush has grown government so large he took a budget surplus and turned it into one of the largest deficits ever. State government has shrunk. In fact, we had more state employees in 1973 than we have now, despite quite a few more residents. Under former Republican Gov. Bill Milliken we had 52,673 state employees. In 2000 under former Republican Gov. John Engler there were 61,493 state employees. In 2006 there were only 52,255 employees.

So that disproves your “Vote Republican and you get lower taxes, a thriving economy” myth. It’s never as simple as simple as just cutting taxes, and there is no way, no way, we can cut taxes low enough to compete with China or some other third world country where the jobs are being shipped in that category, and why would we want to?

Of course I disagree, and I have shown you facts, and you give me your misguided opinions.

I use the name conservative media because that’s what the media is, and as a former reporter I am all too familiar with that fact. But, thanks for your link, that’s the first time you have done so, and I respect the fact you take ownership of what you write.

Michigan will not have a revote, and if you voted in the Republican primary what makes you think you would or should be allowed to vote in our primary, anyway? This situation was not created entirely by the Democrats, by the way.

I am an Obama supporter, but I will vote for Sen. Clinton if she gets the nomination. After a 20-year naval career, I once had a lot of respect for Sen. McCain. I still have that same respect for his military bravery, but the way he has flip-flopped just to get elected made we lose respect for him as a leader. You can call him a lot of things, but liberal is not one of them. I will only vote for the person I think will do the best job. I guess I’m old fashioned, but I think a vote is too precious to waste or play with.

Anonymous said...

You said it yourself in your 3rd posting quote "Dillon and his thugs did every thing they could to get this on the ballot"

You are exactly right it was Dillon and the Democrat party who hired the "thugs" to intimidate old people. They hired a 7 time felon, they had young paid staffers on MI tax payer time intimidate OLD people.

How do you call yourself a man when condone convicted felons intimidating senior citizens, you have to be kidding me.

You yourself said it Dillon and his thugs I think that says it all about the Democrat party.

Also you have to be joking when you say the Govenor of a state has not control of businesses in their own state. What do they have control over than?

How pathetic

Communications guru said...

Thanks for pointing out that correction, afraid-to-identify-yourself. I will make that correction right away. “Drolet and his thugs did every thing they could to get this on the ballot."

The convicted felon you talk about, as I have already pointed out, was hired before the Michigan Democratic Party knew he had a previous record. When it was pointed out to them, they let him go. As I said before, I disagree with that decision. He paid his debt to society, and if we expect to help people stay straight and out of prison we have to give them a second change. You nor Drolet’s thugs- hell, for all I know you may be Drolet – have not pointed - or proved that is - one thing he did that was improper.

There were no “young paid staffers on MI tax payer time” pointing out your lies to people who may sign the petition, and there was no intimidation of anyone, including “old people.”

Again, the governor does not control monetary policy or trade policy, the two biggest influences on the economy. Why do you think the country is in a recession? What the Governor has control over, to a point, is the tax policy, which is about average, and marinating good infrastructure that business needs and quality education. All of those things cost money

Anonymous said...

Do you actually know what the definition of a recession is.

Let me teach you:

It is two consecutive quarters of negative growth.

Please show me those two consecutive quarters. Stop just stating the Democrat party line.

Also prove to me that Drolets senior citizens were thugs. Why are you saying they are thugs? What did these senior citizens do to be labeled by you as thugs?

How dare you call these senior citizens thugs.

And yes it was proven that these staffers were their during the day when they are on our dime.

Before you make all of these statement you need to put some facts behind them then not just the emotion that all liberals make most decisions on.

Anonymous said...

Random Events
By Thomas Sowell
Tuesday, May 6, 2008

Sometimes unrelated events nevertheless tell a coherent story.

One newspaper story that caught my eye recently was about two high-powered schools in South Korea where Korean girls study 15 hours a day, preparing themselves for tests to get into elite colleges in the United States. Harvard, Yale and Princeton already have 34 students from those schools.

When a copy of the 50th anniversary report on members of the Harvard class of 1958 arrived in the mail recently, I thought back to one of my fellow students in that class who had worn a hole in the sole of his shoe but put a folded piece of newspaper in his shoe to cover the hole, rather than tell his parents.

He realized that they would buy him a new pair of shoes if they knew-- and he also realized that they could not afford it.

He went on to become a professor at several well-known medical schools and to have various achievements and honors over the years.

From even further back in time, I received a letter recently from a man who grew up in my old neighborhood back in Harlem. When he and I were in the same junior high school, one day a teacher who saw him eating his brown bag lunch suddenly arranged for him to get a lunch from the school cafeteria without having to pay for it.

It happened so fast that my schoolmate had already taken a bite from the school lunch when he suddenly realized that he had been given charity-- and he wouldn't swallow the food. Instead he went to the toilet and spat it out.

By now his brown bag lunch had been thrown out, so he just went hungry that day. He went on to become a very successful psychiatrist.

Like everyone else, I have also been hearing a lot lately about Jeremiah Wright, former pastor of the church that Barack Obama has belonged to for 20 years.

Both men, in their different ways, have for decades been promoting the far left vision of victimization and grievances-- Wright from his pulpit and Obama as a community organizer for the radical group ACORN, as a collaborator with former Weatherman terrorist Bill Ayers, and as the member of the U.S. Senate with the farthest left voting record.

Later, when the ultimate political prize-- the White House-- loomed on the horizon, Obama did a complete makeover, now portraying himself as a healer of divisions.

The difference between Barack Obama and Jeremiah Wright is that they are addressing different audiences, using different styles adapted to those audiences.

It is a difference between upscale demagoguery and ghetto demagoguery, playing the audience for suckers in both cases.

People on the far left like to flatter themselves that they are for the poor and the downtrodden. But what is most likely to lift people out of poverty-- telling them that the world has done them wrong or promoting the work ethnic of the Korean girls, the dogged determination of my Harvard classmate with the newspaper in his shoe, or the self-reliance of my fellow junior high school student in Harlem who had too much pride to take charity?

When young people go out into the world, what will they have to offer that can gain them the rewards they seek from others and the achievements they need for themselves?

Will they have the skills of science, technology or medicine?

Or will they have only the resentments that have been whipped up by the likes of Jeremiah Wright or the sense of entitlement from the government that has been Barack Obama's stock in trade?

In the real world, a sense of grievance or entitlement, as a result of the mistreatment of your ancestors, is not likely to get you very far with people who are too busy dealing with current economic realities to spend much time thinking about their own ancestors, much less other people's ancestors.

Another seemingly unrelated experience was being in a crowd at a graveside in a Jewish cemetery last week. That crowd included people who were black, white, Asian, Catholic, Jewish and no doubt others. This country has come a long way, just in my lifetime.

We don't need people like either Jeremiah Wright or Barack Obama to take us backward.

The time is long overdue to stop gullibly accepting the left's vision of itself as idealistic, rather than self-aggrandizing.

Thomas Sowell is a senior fellow at the Hoover Institute and author of Basic Economics: A Citizen's Guide to the Economy.

Anonymous said...

My name is Bond, James Bond

Should the MI and FL Democrat Delegates be seated at the Denver convention?

Communications guru said...

Well, former Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan says we are in a recession. I think I’ll take his word over somebody who doesn’t even have the balls to identity themselves and take ownership of what they write. Here’s a link

Prove to me I called any senior citizen a thug because I didn’t. Drolet hired some out of state company to collect the signatures and paid others by the signature.

Sorry, it was not “proven that these staffers were their (sic) during the day when they are on our dime.” All we had was a false accusation by Drolet and video by stalkers, including the wimp over at wrong Michigan, and we know how dishonest Drolet is, I’m a staffer, and if I would have had the vacation time I would have been there.

Brett said...

I think I figured out a couple of things. You choose things that you want to hear and then claim they are true.

It doesn't matter what Alan Greenspan said, although, I think he said we had a 50/50 chance of hitting a recession during this year.

The smart thing to do when in doubt about the definition of a recession is to look it up.

The definition of a recession is 2 consecutive quarters of negative growth. The fourth quarter last year came in at .06%. The first quarter this year was just announced last week. It came in at 0.6%.

So a recession may not be declared until the end of September this year. With the stimulus checks just coming out this week, it's likely the economy will grow during the 2nd and 3rd quarter.

If you were a financial person, I'd tell you to look at the figures for the past six weeks. It appears that we bottomed out on March 20. The economy has been improving since.

There is no recession in this country. There IS a recession in this State.

It's easy to listen or read a news article and see someone say something, but you'll make a fool of yourself if you only use that source and not verify it with other sources.

You said in an earlier post that I know someone who's life has been made better by some of these entitlements. You're very wrong. In my work, I meet a lot of people. I also come from a fairly large family.

Those that go on welfare (in one form or another) stay there. That's not helping and that's not improving their lives. That is making them dependent on the hard working people of this state. They are part of the reason that this state had a financial crisis last year and why we'll have another problem very shortly.

Your dependence on the government is shameful. Do for yourself. It not only helps your self esteem, but it will also help the state.


Communications guru said...

Well, you can ignore what Alan Greenspan said, but if you do then you “choose things that you want to hear and then claim they are true.”

I’ll concede the experts might be debating the fact there is a recession, but based on the job losses, high food and gas prices, the lowering of wages, loss of benefits and record foreclosures I think we are in a recession in this country. What shape you think the economy is in is your business. There’s nothing I’m gong to say that’s ever going to change your mind or take your rose-colored glasses off anyway.

Greenspan said this, “Former Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan said on Tuesday the U.S. economy was in recession, and said it would be appropriate to tap public funds to resolve the mortgage-related crisis that has helped pull the economy under.” And “Greenspan went farther than the Fed has by saying outright that the economy is in a recession, although he said it is too soon to say how deep or prolonged the downturn will be.”

Now, I don’t see how that equates to Greenspan saying there’s a 50/50 chance we will be in a recession, but again you will not let facts upset your theory.

Really. None of your friends or family has ever collected a Social Security check, used Medicaid or Medicare or collected unemployment insurance? Excuse me if I’m just a little skeptical, after all, I was once a journalist.

Scott said...

Do not believe you were ever a journalist.

Communicatons guru what is the definition of a Recession?

You can say all you want about what we may be going in but please tell all of us the definition of a recession.

Scott said...

NEW YORK (Reuters) - The United States has fallen into an "awfully pale recession" and may remain stagnant for the rest of the year, former Federal Reserve chairman Alan Greenspan was quoted on Monday saying.

"We're in a recession," Bloomberg news agency reported Greenspan had said in a television interview. "But this is an awfully pale recession at the moment. The declines in employment have not been as big as you'd expect to see."

Scott said...

Sorry the last quote came from

Scott said...

By the way I see you refuse to answer Anonymous's question so I will ask you.

Do you believe that MI's and FL's Democrat delegates should be seated at the convention?

Communications guru said...

Like I told what-his-name, I could care less if you don’t believe I was a journalist.

The definition of a recession is “a period of an economic contraction, sometimes limited in scope or duration.” But, it’s just a pale recession we are going through. That makes it a lot easier for all the people who have lost their jobs, lost their homes and can’t make ends meet.

I did answer what-his-names question, I think. Since I don’t know who I was addressing I am assuming I did when I said yes.

Scott said...

Comm guru

Your are not telling the whole truth.

The definiton of a recession is:

In macroeconomics, a recession is a decline in a country's real gross domestic product (GDP), or negative real economic growth, for two or more successive quarters of a year.[citation needed]

Why can you not tell the truth?

By the way you did not answer my question. Should MI and FL Democrat delegates be seated at the Denver Convention?

Communications guru said...

Look, it seems to me some leading economists like Allan Greenspan think there is a recession, and perhaps some don’t. I guess we will have to agree to disagree on that. I don’t see how disagreeing with you makes me a liar. I did answer your question and the other guy’s question. The answer is yes.

Scott said...

Communications guru,

In a current posts comment you wrote:

"A recall must come from the district that voted that person in. That’s simply the law; the one you guys broke, by the way. The person collecting the signatures must be a registered voter in the 17th district. You broke that one too. The people who sign the petition must be registered voters in the 17th District. You broke that law too."

Then how can you say you are intelluctually honest the MI and FL Democrat party broke the rules, in fact they were told by the Democrat party officials if you move up your primaries you will not be able to seat your delegates.

What is it the Democrats can break the rules when they want to without consequences but everyone else must follow the rules.

As usual liberal say:

Do as I say not what I do

Communications guru said...

That is a ridiculous analogy. It’s even worse than comparing apples and oranges. As you are probably not aware, the decision to move up the Michigan primary was a joint decision by Mark Brewer and Saul Anuzis. The Republicans were penalized by losing half of their delegates. I have no idea why Iowa and New Hampshire go first every presidential election, and neither did the Democratic and Republican leaders in this state.
In Florida, the decision was made by the Legislature and the Governor, all Republican controlled. Here’s an analogy for you. It used to be illegal for African-Americans to sit in the front of the bus in Alabama. Some laws are made to be broken. The difference in the south is they were upfront and honest with no lies like the supporters of this illegal recall.
You might also be aware that each political party – Republicans, Democrats, Green, Liberations and sodalists – can choose their presidential nominee any way they choose.

Scott1 said...

You have so many hollow agruments it is pitiful.

Rules are rules, if you break them you pay.

But in your world Democrats do not have to pay and Republicans do.

I am done with you

Scott said...

Nice try on trying to not let me post.

Typical Lib, do not like what someone has to say you censor them.


Communications guru said...

When did I ever censor you? You can post all you want because it shows how uninformed and misguided you are. I would never be like the coward over at wrong and ban people I don’t agree with. You have never seen ban anyone and you never will see me censor on this blog, so don’t even give that BS.
You really don’t know much about politics do you? How the party chooses its presidential nominee is their business. The Democrats are the ones who make the rules you say the Democrats are breaking.
You keep saying “I am done with you,” but you keep coming back. Is that supposed to bother me? If you want me to keep kicking your butt and embarrassing you that's your business. I could care one what or the other. The more you post the more you illustrate how uninformed you really are.

Mary said...

You say to Scott "You really don’t know much about politics do you? How the party chooses its presidential nominee is their business"

If that is true than why don't the parties pay for their own primaries instead of having the entire state MI pay for them?

Also Scott said nothing about politics in that post he just said that their are consequences to breaking rules. But it appears in your world those consequences only pertain to Republicans. In your world Democrats do not have to pay consequences.

Now who does not know much about politics?

Communications guru said...

As I am sure you are aware, the two party leaders got together and decided to move up the primary and make Michigan more relevant. In past elections the parties paid for the primary. I think they should have this time, but my Senator and representative did not vote that way.

It’s in more than one comment that your friend displays his ignorance of politics. Are you sure Mary isn’t really Scott? Again, how can you break rules you set? Who do you pay the consequences to? How the national Republican Party decided to seat or not seat its delegates is its business.

The answer is still Scott, or you.

Mary said...

You never answered the question:

"You really don’t know much about politics do you? How the party chooses its presidential nominee is their business"

If that is true than why don't the parties pay for their own primaries instead of having the entire state MI pay for them?

You sure your playing with a full deck or again Democrats have no idea how to anwser questions?

Communications guru said...

I did answer your question. I can’t help it if you either can’t read well or are stubborn. The entire state paid for it because the leaders of the two major political parties convinced the legislators – from both parties - that paying for the primary would be good for Michigan. I disagreed then, and I disagree now.