Aug 25, 2008

General Election starts in earnest for me


TECUMSEH - Sunday was my first official door-knocking session of the 2008 General Election.

I have already knocked doors in the primary for a House candidate , but this is my first time for the General Election. I knocked on some 70 doors Sunday in Tecumseh for State Sen. Mark Schauer, D-Battle Creek, in his quest to unseat extremist conservative Tim Walberg in the race for U.S. House in the 7th District. It was more fun that the extensive walking I did in 2006 because my wife walked with me. She had walked when she was a teen for her dad, but he was a Republican.

The one thing I discovered Sunday was that not many people knew much about Schauer, but we will change that. I had a few people tell me they don’t need to know anything about Schauer they are just sick of Walberg. This is a guy who still thinks Saddam Hussein financed the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks. He’s apparently not a man who will let facts get in the way.

The 7th District has been held by Republicans for many years with Nick Smith and moderate Republican Joe Schwartz. But Schauer has unseated an incumbent Republican before.

The large 7th district covers Branch, Eaton, Hillsdale, Jackson and Lenawee counties and parts of Calhoun and Washtenaw counties. That’s the name recognition battle he faces, but I believe he can overcome it.

The 19th Senate District Schauer represents as the Senate Minority Leader only covers Calhoun County and part of Jackson.

I hope to increase his name recognition in Walberg’s home county of Lenawee door by door. It was once briefly my stomping grounds. I worked as the education reporter for the daily newspaper in Adrian that covers the entire county, and I held that same position with the Blissfield weekly.

13 comments:

Brett said...

Ahhh, Mark Schauer. The guy that helped lead the tax increase of 2007.

Schauer complained that Walberg takes money from big oil. Then it was discovered that he too has taken money from big oil.

Recently, he proposed another tax increase on oil while trying to mask it as a "fee".

The best way to learn about Mark Schauer is to look at the economic situation in Michigan. He's directly responsible along with Granholm for the decline of the State of Michigan.

I wonder why he hasn't accepted the offer to debate Walberg on a Battle Creek radio program. It couldn't be because he might actually have to answer some questions for a change.

Walberg will be the winner of this contest. The district is Republican and Conservative. In the 2006 primaries there were two incumbents nationwide that lost their seats in their primaries. One was Cynthia McKinney (she of slap a cop fame) and Joe Schwarz. People of this district don't reward someone that runs as a conservative, then legislates as a liberal. So out went Schwarz and in came Tim Walberg.

Walberg has been a strong proponent of drilling for our own oil, which by the way, over 70% of the people in this country are in favor.

We have a choice between the honesty of Walberg who works for the people, or Schauer who works for Mark Schauer and wants to do to the country what he and Granholm have done to the State of Michigan, which is to increase taxes, increase spending and to heck with the people he's supposed to represent.

Walberg will win.

Brett
conservativelifestyle.blogspot.com

Communications guru said...

No, the Mark Schauer who helped keep Michigan government open. He is the Senate Minority Leader, meaning Democrats in the Senate are in the minority, which means for the Democrats to pass anything in the Senate it needs bipartisan support.

This is from the Battle Creek Inquirer, "According to Federal Election Commission records, Schauer has not gotten any contributions from big oil companies during his congressional campaign." http://www.battlecreekenquirer.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080803/NEWS01/808030315

Now, I have no idea if Schauer received contributions from oil companies for his Senate campaign, but he has certainly not gotten any from their push to obtain more leases.

How about giving me some proof that "Recently, he proposed another tax increase on oil while trying to mask it as a "fee'" so I can debunk it or acknowledge it.

The situation in Michigan has a lot to do with the more than 3 million manufacturing jobs that have left the country, the lack of any enforcement of the trade agreements and the terrible economic polices from Bush that has led to a recession. Once again, the governor can only do so much to effect a states' economy, and with all the new investment coming to Michigan, she's succeeding in diversyi9ng the state's economy despite Bush's policies.

Again, show some proof for your debate claim. I'll guarantee you this: there will be debates.

The district may be relatively conservative, but they are not stupid. Regardless, I will be out there doing what I can.

"Walberg has been a strong proponent of drilling for our own oil?" How does that happen? If the oil companies were granted even more leases in Alaska, that oil would go on the open, international market anyway.

Your putting the words honest and Walberg in the same sentence? What about his claim that Iraq financed 9/11? "Schauer who works for Mark Schauer?" What the hell does that mean? And Wahlberg does not work for Wahlberg?

Wahlberg may win, but there is certainly no guarantee. Regardless, I will be out there pounding the pavement for Mark Schauer.

Brett said...

You're walking and knocking on doors singing the praises of Mark Schauer and you don't know what he's done or what's proposed?

I'm trying to imagine what you say to someone when you go to their door. 'I'm here to ask you to vote for Mark Schauer. Here's a picture of him, isn't he cute? We sure hope you'll choose him over that evil Republican he's running against.'

By the way, getting three Republicans to vote for a tax increase that pushes it over the top by one vote doesn't make it bi-partisan. It only means there were three weak Republicans that joined the liberals in confiscating more money out of the people that can't afford to pay more because this state is in a one state recession.

Brett
conservativelifestyle.blogspot.com

Communications guru said...

Who says I don't know what "he's done or what's proposed?" You? When I go to a door, I know what I'm doing. I have done a lot of door-to-door campaigning since 2006.

By the way, the Senate is controled by Republicans, and no matter how you spin it, the vote to keep Michigan open takes a majority to pass, as well as any measure. The country is a recession, not just Michigan, and Michigan's problem is the current administration's polices hurt the state's biggest employer hard.

ka_Dargo said...

"This state is in a one state recession." WTF?

Are you saying Michigan is the only state in the Union suffering from the recession the entire country is suffering from?

Are you sure about that Brett?

Naaa...I didn't think so.

Brett said...

These are your words from 7:19 a.m. : Now, I have no idea if Schauer received contributions from oil companies for his Senate campaign, but he has certainly not gotten any from their push to obtain more leases.

How about giving me some proof that "Recently, he proposed another tax increase on oil while trying to mask it as a "fee'" so I can debunk it or acknowledge it.

So the answer is, you said you don't know what he's done or proposed. It's okay with me. I'd rather have uninformed liberals talking about someone and when people find out that what they were told at their front door wasn't rrue, they'll take it personally, as they should.

As for the recession. Don't tell me you haven't heard it nearly everywhere that we are in a one state recession. The fact is, the country is not in a recession. When you get positive growth in the economy, it's not a recession. It's growth.

Brett
conservativelifestyle.blogspot.com

Communications guru said...

Yes, those are my word at 7:19 a.m., and I stand by them now. Like I said this morning, now, I have no idea if Schauer received contributions from oil companies for his Senate campaign, but he has certainly not gotten any from their push to obtain more leases. I also provided a link to back that up. If you are making the claim that he did, then you provide the proof.

I’m still waiting for proof of your false claim that he proposed another tax increase on oil while trying to mask it as a "fee.” You made the claim, not me. I know it’s not true. I have no idea how you reach the conclusion I don’t know what he’s done or proposed just because you can’t back up your claims. Unbelievable.

Of course I have heard of the Grand Oil Party talking point of the “one state recession.” It’s simply not true: the entire country is in a recession.

Brett said...

http://www.wilx.com/news/headlines/26676824.html

A lawmaker wants oil and gas companies to pay Michigan higher royalty fees when leasing state-owned land.
The extra revenue would be spent to transition to renewable energy.
When oil or natural gas is found on land where the state owns the mineral rights, the state gets one-sixth of the gross proceeds.
Legislation to be announced tomorrow by Democratic state Senator Mark Schauer would boost the state's share to half.
Companies also would be given a shorter leash to drill state land or see it leased to somebody else.
Schauer doesn't expect oil and gas companies to like his plan.
Oil officials have pointed out that many leased lands are still being explored and may not contain oil and natural gas.

Communications guru said...

Let’s see if I got this right: Mark wants the people who own the land to get their fair share of the huge profits the oil companies are reaping and that’s a tax increase in your book? OK, fine, I support that tax, fee or whatever you cal it. That makes you correct, I guess.

Brett said...

Interesting. You advocate taking people's retirement money, IRA's, and other investments because you think the oil companies are earning too much money. Yet, the state already confiscates 16.7% from the oil companies. Schauer is advocating boosting that 50%.

He just has a couple of problems with this plan. First, he can't use the money as he wants. Constitutionally it must be used for conservation. But he says he's sure that he can "find a way around the constitution".

Secondly, this is just another example of the Democrat Party in Michigan driving out business from the state. Oil companies would have no reason to stay if their profits are cut down even further. Remember, they make only 7.4 cents per gallon.

I think that should be enough of a response. I can see that you're getting frustrated, but I do thank you for admitting that the Democrats, including you, are tax and spenders, which is why Schauer will not be elected.

Brett

Communications guru said...

.

I “advocate taking people's retirement money, IRA's, and other investments?” That’s a heck of a stretch. Also not true. No one is confiscating anything. You sure pulled those number out of your ass.

Where are you getting this stuff “that he can’t use the money as he wants?” Using the money for renewable energy sure fit’s the definition of conservation. The old royalty system is outdated, and states like Alaska, Colorado, Texas, Wyoming, Oklahoma, and Louisiana have a system resembling what Mark wants to go to.
http://www.battlecreekenquirer.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080812/NEWS01/808120314/1002

This “9 cents a gallon” myth is not even close.
http://liberalmedianot.blogspot.com/2008/08/swift-boating-of-obama-has-begun.html

It’ not the Democratic Party driving businesses out of Michigan. Need I remind you who is responsible for the loss of 3 million manufacturing jobs?

I’m getting frustrated? With what? Of course Democrats are “tax and spenders.” So are Republicans and every other government official. That’s how government operates. People pay taxes for essential services and government officials spend the money on those services.

Now, Schauer may not win, but right now it’s pretty much tied. Regardless, I will do whatever I can to make sure he wins. If I’m knocking on doors in Eaton County on Connie Lane I’ll drop off some Schauer literature. Nah, that would be a waste of my time, I’ll go to somebody’s door who has an open mind.

Brett said...

You use yourself as a source? I'll bet you have a hard time finding a hat to fit you.

Brett

Communications guru said...

No, I used the post as a source where I debunked your false claim about oil companies only making only 9 cents a gallon. In the comments section, you will see where I got the info to debunk your claim. The link to the reference is in the comments. I'm just a little tired of debunking the false stuff you post, and then you go and use the same debunked info somewhere else. You are very good at the Grand Oil Party strategy of if you tell a lie often enough.

I don't wear hats.