Dubie must be gearing up to look like Governor material.
 

I see Doyle is trying to use his dopey little survey as the basis for instituting four-year terms for legislators. Get over it Billy. Filling out your survey equates roughly to doodling during Town Meeting.

If this year's session is any indication, maybe six-month terms might be a better way to go.
 

Its funny how far back the comments on this blog have scaled back now that the Legislature has its nose to the grindstone.

Makes you wonder how many of the comments posted on this blog are from legislators!
 

You finally got me! Can't hide it any more.
 

I will begin to fill the space vacated by heathen legislators. My all powerful voice will resonate with all who hear its melifluous tones. Not only will I share my infinite wisdom with the blogging riff-raff, I will also record powerful messages and pay a local radio station to broadcast them across this fair land. This John Birch fellow has nothing on the great and powerful me. To those who seek to actually practice what the Bible teaches (I mean the heathen Democrats), I will continue to belittle and defame your efforts, as they do not conform to my narrow, small-minded ways. The great and powerful me has spoken.
 

You go boy!!
 

Somehow I just knew that Cola Hudson was a regular blogger on this site!
 

I find that many times McLaughry is overly simplistic or off-base. But at least there is a voice of opposition to the Stalinist politically correct orthodoxy of this state. Let's see: Speaker of the House - limousine liberal. Speaker Pro Tem of the Senate - limousine liberal wannabe. Treasurer - Democrat. Secretary of State - Democrat. Auditor - Democrat (when awake and sober). Primary political columnist - ultra-leftist (albeit retarded).
 

Critics of McLaughry are like those that want to silence FOX network, WalMart, all conservative Christians, and of course, global-warming sceptics. They just can't stand having to be confused with facts.
 

Sorry, bubba, I wouldn't agree that someone like, say, Bill O'Reilly is an honest purveyor of "facts." All I'm saying is that there is a far left, unthinking, political orthodoxy in this state. Anyone who closely followed O'Reilly's rants against the state of Vermont after Judge Cashman's decision knows that he was no more encumbered by the truth than the Left is in this state.
 

While all of the liberals in the state sat around doing NOTHING about enacting a Jessica's Law (gee, wonder if the homosexual activist Lippert running the House Judiciary had anything to do with that) or even getting tough on pedophiles, at least O'Reilly had the guts to bring this shame to the attention of Vermonters! But then again, we all hate to have our dirty linen aired, don't we!
 

there are no facts that support global warming skeptics. and the problem with the "Conservative Christian" bloc of voters is that they are tied too closely with interests that are at odds with the teachings of Christ. i wonder how many WWJD people thought invading Iraq was something Jesus would've done. if you want to invoke the message of Jesus (and this is not a bad thing), do it consistently.
 

Bubba, I think you are correct that O'Reilly may have brought the shame of Cashman's ruling to the attention of Vermonters, but he went way over the top and did not add any "facts" to the mix.
 

The shame didn't lie with Cashman, it lay with prison system and whoever instituted the rule regarding treatment.
 

No, the shame did lie with Cashman. He was willing to virtually let a child molester off the hook to "send a message" to the Dept. of Corrections.
 

It wasn't to "send a message." It was to change a stupid policy by the Department of Corrections.

And guess, what, Cashman prevailed and Corrections rightly changed their policy. Now, based on the policy change, more inmates will get the treatment they need, and we'll all be safer because of it.
 

the guy belonged in jail, whether the DOC offered treatment or not. end of story.
 

The guy ended up in jail after the Corrections department changed their policy, anyway so there's no reason to complain. Cashman deserves praise rather than criticism for getting the DOC to change their policy. (Even if they hadn't Cashman still sentenced him to some jail time.)

Also, which would you rather have: someone who's been treated for a problem they have and then comes back into society or someone who's had his ways hardened in jail for a couple years and then is released back into society?

I'll take the criminal who's received the treatment every time.

It's important to take the long term into account.
 

whether it's important to "take the long term" into account or not, the sentence was wrong. if i, as the judge, don't see treatment in jail, i let the guy free? a 33 yo old guy who repeatedly molested a little girl?
 

That is the truth.
 

Brian Dubie for Governor.
 

Cashman could have brough up his concerns regarding treatment to the legislature -which he never did. This policy change would have been made and this uproar would have been avoided.
 

It's inappropriate for the judiciary to lobby the legislature.

Many times good changes come from the judiciary when the legislature doesn't have the guts or political will to make changes.

Complain and moan all you want, but his ruling was effective and turned out for the good.
 

No, it did not turn out "for the good."
 

Yes it did. The policy was changed and the guy was given a harsher sentence. What was it you were looking for?
 

What was I looking for? Oh, how about a long term of incarcertation, with no opportunity for parole, the first time he was sentenced? Because what he did was illegal and wrong and worthy of a long prision senctence, with or without "treatment." That's what.
 

So, lock them up and throw away the key? Vermont can't afford that mentality. Overfilling our jails is bankrupting this state.

If we want to make society safer, we have to invest in more prevention programs and more services for victims.
 

The sentencing issue was not about whether we as a state invest in prvention programs. It was about giving one individual the sentence he deserved.
 

There are some that just have to be locked up forever and we just have to admit it.
 

Agreed. No one (not the administration, not the prosecutor, not the victim's rights groups) was arguing that in the Cashman case (except for the Yahoos in TV-land).
 

Sexual predators can not be cured
or treated!
 

Perhaps Vermont could start banning perverts from riding their bicycles naked thru the streets of Burlington this summer. What a wonderful image for little children to see! Bill O'Reilly tells it like it is - and that's what makes people feel guilty.
 

1) O'Reilly falsely claimed Bush didn't oppose 9-11 Commission. O'Reilly defended President George W. Bush from a Kerry-Edwards '04 TV ad highlighting Bush's opposition to creation of the 9-11 Commission by denying that Bush had ever opposed the commission. In fact, Bush did oppose the creation of the 9-11 Commission. (10/21/04)

2) O'Reilly falsely claimed Iraq had ricin. O'Reilly responded to a caller to his radio show by defending the Iraq war: "They did have ricin up there in the north -- so why are you discounting that so much?" In fact, the Duelfer report (the final report of the Iraqi Survey Group, led by Charles A. Duelfer, which conducted the search for weapons in Iraq following the U.S.-led invasion) indicates that Iraq did not have ricin. (10/19/04)

3) O'Reilly repeated discredited claims on Iraq-Al Qaeda link. O'Reilly interrupted a former Clinton administration official who tried to correct the record on O'Reilly's claim that terrorist Abu Musab al-Zarqawi constitutes a direct link between Al Qaeda and Saddam Hussein's Iraq. He also allowed a conservative guest to repeat without challenge other discredited claims about Iraq's supposed involvement in terrorism -- claims O'Reilly has himself cited in the past. (9/27/04)

4) O'Reilly fabricated "Paris Business Review" as source for success of French boycott. O'Reilly falsely claimed "they've lost billions of dollars in France according to 'The Paris Business Review'" due to an American boycott he advocated of French imports. Media Matters for America found no evidence of a publication named "The Paris Business Review." (4/27/04)

5) O'Reilly cited phony stats to argue that taxes on rich are excessive. O'Reilly tried to "blow off" the argument that wealthy Americans ought to pay more taxes by citing phony statistics about the tax burden the rich currently bear. (6/30/04)

6) O'Reilly confused on elementary economics. O'Reilly told a caller on his radio show, "We [the United States] have a trade deficit with everybody, because everybody wants our stuff, and we're not wild about snails" -- indicating that he doesn't know the definition of "trade deficit" and implying that the United States runs a trade surplus with France. In fact, in the first four months of 2004, the United States had a $3 billion trade deficit with France. (6/10/04)

7) O'Reilly doctored quotation to suggest Soros wished his own father dead. During his smear campaign against progressive financier, philanthropist, and political activist George Soros, O'Reilly doctored a 1995 quotation by Soros to make it seem as if Soros wished his own father dead. (6/1/04)

8) O'Reilly questioned if Kennedy would show up to Democratic convention ... as Kennedy spoke behind him. O'Reilly teased an upcoming segment of The O'Reilly Factor, broadcast live from the Democratic National Convention, by saying of convention speaker Senator Edward Kennedy: "When we come back, we'll let you listen to Ted Kennedy for a while, if he shows up." In fact, Kennedy had already shown up and had been speaking for several minutes, as O'Reilly need only have turned around to see. (7/27/04)

9) O'Reilly disparaged Democrats with trifecta of voter falsehoods. In a discussion about what went wrong for Democrats in the November 2 election, O'Reilly claimed that Democrats "lost votes from four years ago"; that "18- to 24[-year-old]s didn't go" to the polls; and that "[c]ommitted Republicans didn't carry the day for the president; independents did." All three claims are false. (11/4/04)

10) O'Reilly on the radio: Three lies, one broadcast. Lie No. 1: Bush tax cuts didn't create the budget deficit. Lie No. 2: "Socialistic" French, Germans, and Canadian governments tax at 80 percent. Lie No. 3: Canadian, British, and French media are "government-controlled," but Italian media is free. (7/7/04)
 

Media Matters and George Soros? Gee, you must also have some quotes from Al Franken an Barbra Steisand! Although most all of those anti-O'Reilly sentiments have been proven to be non-existent or just plain left-wing lies, what in hell does any of it have to do with O'Reilly exposing child molesters and their enablers??? The leftists just LOVE whistle-blowers until it is their side that gets exposed!
 

You're right. O'Reilly is a tool. I hate him. And this has to do with whether Mark Hulett's sentence was appropriate how?
 

Funny how many people that "hate" O'Reilly watch him! Guess that's why he's number one. You know, if you want your little pacifier to suck on, just switch over to Olberman on MSNBC, no chance of any of those annoying little opposing views there!!!
 

I wouldn't be caught dead watching
O'Reily!
 

Bubba, I've been arguing on your side on the Cashman sentencing issue. That doesn't mean O'Reilly is right about everything. You've gotten off track here.
 

Let's see if Dubie can get elected Governor without a progressive in the race!
 

Of course O'Reilly is not always right. But he will always allow opposing views on his program. As a matter of fact, FOX seems to have MANY more liberals on their shows than the combined number of conservatives allowed on MSNBC, CBS, NBC, ABC, CNN, and NPR COMBINED!
 

Note: there's a difference between "not being caught dead" watching O'Reilly, and "not watching O'Reilly."
 

OK, I don't watch him, period.