vt.Buzz ~ a political blog

Political notes from Free Press staff writers Terri Hallenbeck, Sam Hemingway and Nancy Remsen

1.02.2008

Citizen legislature in jeopardy?

Legislators are revving up their engines, ready for takeoff to Montpelier.

Nobody's been doing this longer than Bill Doyle, the 81-year-old Republican state senator from Montpelier, who is also a political science professor at Johnson State College. Doyle has some thoughts about the revving of those legislative engines - that perhaps they are idling at too high a speed.

Here's what he has to say:

In recent years, there has been no contest in a significant amount of open
legislative seats during the election year. The political parties have worked
harder than ever to recruit candidates. Potential candidates always ask about
the time requirements and many have expressed they would like to serve, but the
number of months away from their occupations is too great.

Recruitment of legislative candidates is also adversely affected by a
more recent trend, the proliferation of study groups. Senator Peter Shumlin, the
president pro tem, has said: "The line between the citizen legislature and the
full time legislature is the summer study committees. My philosophy has always
been, the fewer the better. Those lawmakers who are appointed to study
committees are often those who do not hold full-time jobs, which has the effect
of limiting input from any lawmakers whose jobs don’t allow them to sit on the
off season study panels."

In recent years, the number of study committees has averaged over 30.
Rep. Anne Donahue, R-Northfield, has written: "Those who fear we are moving more and more toward a full time legislature and oppose it (like myself) be on guard.
There are more and more legislative committees that are meeting on special
topics during the "in between" of a two-year session, in addition to the
oversight committees, the study committees, and the special meetings. The
increase this year is a significant jump." Thirteen new interim study committees
were added this year and the total cost of all the committees is estimated to be
$178,000.

There has been a dramatic increase in the number of bills introduced
in the Vermont General Assembly over the years. During the past 40 years, the
number of bills has doubled from approximately 500 1965 to approximately 1200 in
recent years. This has had the effect of increasing the length of the session
and increases operating costs and has led to increased staffing. In fairness,
legislatures throughout the nation have taken on more responsibility, and the
issues have become more complex.

Increased partisan bickering during the legislative session is another
unfortunate development. It extends the length of sessions and contributes to
the difficulties of recruiting candidates to run for the general assembly.
People who would otherwise be inspired to serve their state listen to the noise
of politics and prefer to stay home.

The ideal of a citizen legislature is in jeopardy in Vermont when we
cannot attract good people to serve. Lack of candidates also has implications
for citizenship in the democratic process. The system works best when the
individual voter has a choice and there is competition for legislative
seats.

How can this be fixed? Indiana and Colorado have a limitation on
the number of bills that a member can introduce during the session. Nebraska has
a limit on the number of bills a committee or a member may introduce. In
Connecticut, legislators may introduce a bill proposal with a short statement of
purpose. This short form is then considered by the committee, and if the
committee is agreeable, it will be drafted into long form.

In recent years throughout the nation, the public has favored limiting
legislative sessions, and according to the Book of the States, published by the
Council of State Governments: "Voters in Alaska, Colorado, Louisiana, Nevada and
Oklahoma all approved constitutional amendments that resulted in shorter
legislative sessions. Vermont is one of the few states that place no limit on
the length of legislative sessions." Maybe it’s time to restrain ourselves, and
make a greater commitment to productivity (and consequently a reduction the
amount of political wrangling).

Decreasing the introduction of bills could decrease the length of
legislative sessions, would increase the possibility of recruiting more people
to run for the general assembly, would create greater public confidence in the
legislature, and would result in better utilization of staff time.
It would help preserve the citizen legislature and aid the democratic process by
increasing the possibility of competition for a legislative seat.

If we expect good management practices from our state agencies, we
should implement good management practices for the Vermont General
Assembly.

- Terri Hallenbeck

posted by vt.Buzz | 2:36 PM |

Comments:

I was skeptical when I began reading Doyle's piece. By the time I finished reading it I was thinking that it's worth trying out some of his ideas.

I don't think it's right to limit the leingth of the legislative session by statute. That would weaken the legislature too much and put it at the mercy of the Executive branch ... which is in session every day.

I like the statement of purpose idea.

Summer study committees are good because they educate our legislators about important topics. Our legislators need to be experts in certain areas (healthcare and school spending for example) and they need to be able to dig into these issues deeply.

The draw backs of study committees are obvious ... but what's the alternative to a well-informed legislature??

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 2:57 PM, January 02, 2008

I wonder if Doyle could remain awake during the many committee hearings that would have to be held on a dramatic change like the one he wants to propose. Maybe if they offered free food at each hearing? That might keep his interest. As for Donahue, here's hoping Northfield voters finally send her packing in 2008. Does she even have a job, or does Daddy Warbucks keep her solvent?

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 3:45 PM, January 02, 2008

That was uncalled for.

I want to see Doyle and Donahue voted out ... but we should assail the positions that they take ... and not level personal attacks.

If we can't do that, we don't deserve to win their seats back.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 3:54 PM, January 02, 2008

Several comments:

1. One reason there were so many uncontested legislative seats in 2006 is that Jim Barnett was focused much more on electing Martha Rainville to Congress than on the legislative races. Rob Roper isn't going to devote much effort to going after Peter Welch in 2008, but Roper is focused much more on legislative races, and recruiting legislative candidates, than Barnett was in the last cycle. The GOP may not end up gaining many seats in 2008, but there will be far fewer unopposed Dems this year than there were in 2006.

2. Rather than limit the number of bills that can be introduced, something that will shift the balance power from the legislative to the executive branch(would Doyle be making this proposal if there were a Democratic governor now?), how about raising the legislators' pay so that more people could afford to serve? Right now, most legislators are either retired, have jobs that they can do only 1 or 2 days a week during the session (lawyers, business owners, or Doyle himself, who teaches all his classes at Johnson State on Mondays when the legislature is meeting), or people who don't need a good salary because their spouse or partner supports the family (Speaker Symington is an example here). I know raising legislative pay would not be a popular thing, but if legislators were paid the average salary in Vermont (I believe that's somewhere in the $40,000 - $45,000 range), more people would be interested in serving in Montpelier.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 4:54 PM, January 02, 2008

The Vermont Legislative session needs to be much much shorter. Your Average Joe can not leave work for months and months. I suggest that they meet in Jan and Feb and then go home for the year. There are many states that only meet for 2 months a year.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 5:40 PM, January 02, 2008

I'd opt for making it a full time job. so that there would be less absences and legislature could direct its full attention at issues.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 6:19 PM, January 02, 2008

Anonymous said...

"The Vermont Legislative session needs to be much much shorter. Your Average Joe can not leave work for months and months. I suggest that they meet in Jan and Feb and then go home for the year. There are many states that only meet for 2 months a year."

Then I'm sure you won't mind listing them.

# Posted by:

JWCoop10 | 7:23 PM, January 02, 2008

Why would anyone want to "prove" anything to jw - he lives in a "different" fantasy world in his little furnished room where facts mean nothing, only what Bill Maher tells him his true late at night. At least Hoffer disappeared when his "conclusions" and "facts" were outed to be the shams that they were. Are you listening jw-hoffer?

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 6:48 AM, January 03, 2008

The concept of a citizen legislature is outdated. The issues facing the state are serious and require skilled professionals to address them.

In a state that regulates professional standards for the likes of beauticians and tattoo artists, I find it ponderous that we accept a part time legislature comprised of diary farmers, retired people and school teachers.

Nothing wrong with any of those jobs...it's just not the background we need in Montpelier leading us into the future. I would prefer someone viewing their position as a profession, not a hobby.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 7:20 AM, January 03, 2008

Please. This is a state of just over 600,000 people. Smaller than Austin. Smaller than Cleveland. Smaller than Westchester County NY.

States that are 10 times larger - see Indiana for example - have legislatures that meet far less frequently and conduct their affairs far more efficiently. In Indiana, the second year of the biennium is for budget matters only (as I understand it) and they are only there for a month or so. Many other states have similar set-ups.

The question should be: in a state this tiny, do we really need a legislature that meets for 6 months every single year? Do people really feel we are being better served because of that?

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 8:43 AM, January 03, 2008

Vermont never needed anything but a citizen legislature until recently, and still shouldn't. The liberal invasion of the state has brought with it a nanny state that needs constant supervision by leftist social-planners. We must have pre-pre-schools, human rights commissions for newly-discovered protected classes, womens ommissions, planners, environmental nay-sayers, and every other wacko-feel-good garbage. Take back Vermont!!!

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 8:50 AM, January 03, 2008

Come on bubba ... just say it ... it's the Jew's fault. Bill Maher, Bernie Sanders, Ben Cohen ... you don't need to name every one of them ... don't hide your views.

Just give us your unvarnished opinion.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 9:40 AM, January 03, 2008

"Come on bubba ... just say it ... it's the Jew's fault. Bill Maher, Bernie Sanders, Ben Cohen ... you don't need to name every one of them ... don't hide your views. "

Like him or not, Bubba has been pretty straight forward in his view. I don't think I have seen one posting from him that shows the blatant bigotry that you just did. Exactly what prejudices do you harbor?

Perhaps you should

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 10:27 AM, January 03, 2008

Virginia delegates, who are scheduled to adjourn in mid-February, have some 3,000 bills to plough through between now and then.

But Virginia Minority Leader Del. Frank Hall (D-Richmond) proposed last year that the state's short session be cut further. Hall was unsuccessful, but says he still believes more capable people would be willing to serve in the part-time legislature if the session was abbreviated further. Extended sessions cost the government $70,000 per day, Hall said.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 10:59 AM, January 03, 2008

Former Georgia House Speaker Thomas Murphy, (D) -- the longest-serving state house speaker in the nation until he was defeated for reelection in 2002-- agrees shorter sessions are better.

"If you didn't have a limited period, you wouldn't have anybody to serve," he said

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 11:02 AM, January 03, 2008

Anonymous said...

"Please. This is a state of just over 600,000 people. Smaller than Austin. Smaller than Cleveland. Smaller than Westchester County NY."

And Wyoming is 10 times the size of VT and has even fewer people. SFW. What's your point, little fella?

"States that are 10 times larger - see Indiana for example - have legislatures that meet far less frequently and conduct their affairs far more efficiently."

"In Indiana, the second year of the biennium is for budget matters only (as I understand it) and they are only there for a month or so. Many other states have similar set-ups."

So, I'm supposed to buy your half-baked - "as you understand it" - Indiana BS as evidence, little fella? Nice try. That's just not gonna happen.

"The question should be: in a state this tiny, do we really need a legislature that meets for 6 months every single year? Do people really feel we are being better served because of that?"

Once again, nice try, little fella, but I'm not interested in what you think the question should be, I prefer to focus on what the question is and your inability to answer it as posed.

So, can ya handle that? Do you have anything beyond your usual ignorant, ill-informed, "as you understand it" opinion to substantiate you latest load of lunatic-fringe rubbish?

That's what I thought.

Either Cough up the goods my evidentiary-challenged anonymous little friend or stuff a sock in it.

Always a pleasure.

# Posted by:

JWCoop10 | 11:31 AM, January 03, 2008

Folks,

You need to look at how those states with shorter sessions operate - for instance, Utah, I believe, has a 45 day session. What does that mean - it means they are actually on the House or senate floor for 45 days of session - however, many of their committees meet year round to complete their work.

Most times the shorter sessions are because the committees meet more often.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 11:44 AM, January 03, 2008

bubba said...

"Why would anyone want to "prove" anything to jw...."

To demonstrate that they could.

In other words, you can't.

What else is flippin' new.

"..he lives in a "different" fantasy world in his little furnished room where facts mean nothing, only what Bill Maher tells him his true late at night."

Really? How so? Knock yourself out, bubbles.

"At least Hoffer disappeared when his "conclusions" and "facts" were outed to be the shams that they were. Are you listening jw-hoffer?"

He did, eh? They were, eh? When? Where? By whom?

That's what I thought.

So, now you're back on your "I'm Doug Hoffer horsebrit" kick, eh,?

Don't ya think the list of things you can't prove is long enough, bubbles?

# Posted by:

JWCoop10 | 11:47 AM, January 03, 2008

Bubba's bigotry is thinly veiled. He blames the "New Yorkers" like Ben Cohen, Jerry Greenfield and Bernie Sanders.

He has never refuted the claim that he blames the jews for many social and political ills.

Bubba's bigotry is very clear.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 11:51 AM, January 03, 2008

Anonymous said...

Folks, You need to look at how those states with shorter sessions operate - for instance, Utah, I believe, has a 45 day session...."

Ya mean the little fella is tryin' to snow us with his usual apples and oranges comparisons?!!

Say it ain't so, whatever the hell your name is.

# Posted by:

JWCoop10 | 11:52 AM, January 03, 2008

I was the person that made the post re. the Indiana legislature. I thought my comments were on topic. This is only the second time I have ever posted on this site and so just checked back to see what others thought of my comments. I was very surprised to see another commenter attack me personally and tell me to "stuff a sock in it" and tell me my on-topic comments were "lunatic fringe rubbish".

Please be considerate of other posters and resist the urge to attack them personally. We are all adults here.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 11:53 AM, January 03, 2008

Anonymous said...
"Come on bubba ... just say it ... it's the Jew's fault. Bill Maher, Bernie Sanders, Ben Cohen ... you don't need to name every one of them ... don't hide your views. "

"Like him or not, Bubba has been pretty straight forward in his view."

So were Hitler, Strom Thurmond and Trent Lott. What's you point, little fella?

"I don't think I have seen one posting from him that shows the blatant bigotry that you just did."

Ah, yes, the ol' "if you hate Nazis for murdering your ancestors you're a bigot" song and dance.

Nice try, little fella.

What bigotry did he show? Where? When? How?

"Exactly what prejudices do you harbor?"

They can speak for themselves, but I detest ignorant, knuckle-draggin' "Take Back Vermont" nitwits who fancy themselves to be the voice of "real" Vermonters almost as much as I love slowly pulling their wings off, holding a magnifying glass over them on a sunny day like today and watching them burst into flames so ya can imagine how much I'm enjoying myself right now.

On second thought, ya probably can't, but ya can try.

Always a pleasure.

10:27 AM, January 03, 2008

# Posted by:

JWCoop10 | 12:14 PM, January 03, 2008

Mr. Colby, I presume?

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 12:21 PM, January 03, 2008

Anonymous said...

I was the person that made the post re. the Indiana legislature. I thought my comments were on topic. This is only the second time I have ever posted on this site and so just checked back to see what others thought of my comments. I was very surprised to see another commenter attack me personally and tell me to "stuff a sock in it" and tell me my on-topic comments were "lunatic fringe rubbish".

You were, eh? It is, eh? You were, eh? Feel free to prove it and to demonstrate just how I would be able to distinguish you from the other "anonymous" posters, pal.

Tell me, how does one attack an "anonymous" poster personally?

Have I damaged your standing in the community? Are your kids ashamed and afraid to go to school?

Take your time. You're not goin' anywhere.

"Please be considerate of other posters and resist the urge to attack them personally. We are all adults here."

You are, eh?

Always a pleasure.

# Posted by:

JWCoop10 | 12:24 PM, January 03, 2008

JW isn't Colby. Colby is much more literate, reasoned, and amusing. JW occasionally hits it, but he needs a new shtick. I'm tired of "little fella."

BTW, he's right about the legislature. The states where the legislative sessions are short tend to have professional staffs who do the research, writing, negotiating. So all the legislators have to do is show up and vote. (Sort of like Congress...)

VT doesn't have any committee staff (except for admin,) meaning they need to do the research, writing, negotiating themselves. And the issues they're dealing with are increasingly complex.

There's just no going back to the "good old days," as much as Bill Doyle might like to.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 12:32 PM, January 03, 2008

You are anonymous too, "JW". We don't know who you are. A blogger screen name does not mean you are not anonymous. So stop your preachin, lil' man, unless you got something worthwhile to say.

Mr. Coop, or whatever your real name is, your life seems to revolve around this blog. Perhaps it gives you the chance to engage people, cause most people in the "real world" shun you? Cause if you cop that kind of attitude in a real world conversation with real people you must be a lonely, lonely, lonely man . . . lil' man.

How long you been single? How long you been this insecure? How many hours a day do you sit around in your bathrobe, checking this site so that you can fire back at anyone that dares think differently than you? Do you ever stroll into the bathroom, look in the mirror, and say "wow, it's amazing that I am always, always, always right!"

Or perhaps this: you just like to piss people off and get enjoyment out of riling people up. You know you are being rude, but you like it! Way to go through life lil' man!

Here's a topic for you, lil' man: anyone that posts as often as you do on a blog is a loser. period. end of discussion. case closed. no further debate necessary. game over.

Always a pleasure, anonymous lil' man!

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 12:49 PM, January 03, 2008

miller said...

"JW isn't Colby. Colby is much more literate, reasoned, and amusing. JW occasionally hits it, but he needs a new shtick. I'm tired of "little fella."

Well, since your recent evolution/devolution into "miller", you've got nothing to worry about. Happy?

As for the rest of your act, I'll reserve judgement. For now.

# Posted by:

JWCoop10 | 1:11 PM, January 03, 2008

ooh, you forgot "always a pleasure", anonymous lil' man! You off your game or something?

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 1:30 PM, January 03, 2008

He's been off his game since day #1.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 1:38 PM, January 03, 2008

I hope you all read poop's letter in the Times-Argus. Just what is it that those "Christians" have done to you, little fella? Something in the past, maybe? hmmmmmm.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 1:49 PM, January 03, 2008

A couple of thoughts (as a former legislator):

1. Fiscal Impact Statement required of all legislative actions. This would automatically be a section of any legislation. It should apply to creation of study committees, as well for directives for a report from a department or agency. Members (and the public) should see the estimated individual - and cumulative - costs of these actions prior to voting for them.
2. Professional (non-political)staff for the legislature. The Administration has department heads and hundreds of staff upon which to draw. The Legislature - an equal branch - must have resources to balance that ability. Having more staff should help reduce the need for consultants and all the summer study committees.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 2:05 PM, January 03, 2008

Anonymous said...

"You are anonymous too, "JW"."

No, that would be you, little fella. I'm jwcoop10. Go ahead and check if it makes you feel better.

"We don't know who you are."

First of all, who is this "We" for whom you presume to speak, little fella?

That's what I thought.

Secondly, so I don't die of old age waiting for you recount the list of things you don't know, do us both a favor and confine yourself to what you do know.

"A blogger screen name does not mean you are not anonymous."

No, but it means that, unlike you, I'm not posting as an anonymous "anonymous".

"Mr. Coop, or whatever your real name is, your life seems to revolve around this blog."

Do tell. Funny how you're always here to tell me that, little fella. You're so thoughtful that way.

"Perhaps it gives you the chance to engage people, cause most people in the "real world" shun you?"

If you say so.

"Cause if you cop that kind of attitude in a real world conversation with real people you must be a lonely, lonely, lonely man . . . lil' man."

I'll take your word for it.

"How long you been single? How long you been this insecure? How many hours a day do you sit around in your bathrobe, checking this site so that you can fire back at anyone that dares think differently than you? Do you ever stroll into the bathroom, look in the mirror, and say "wow, it's amazing that I am always, always, always right!"

Nah, not with the quality of the comp on this board.

Actually, it's more a case of you never, never knowing what the hell you're talking about and always, always being wrong, but I see your point and the cliff you're about to drive over.

Or perhaps this: you just like to piss people off and get enjoyment out of riling people up. You know you are being rude, but you like it! Way to go through life lil' man!

Well, to paraphrase Hyman Roth in Godfather II, "That is the business you've chosen."

"Here's a topic for you, lil' man: anyone that posts as often as you do on a blog is a loser. period. end of discussion. case closed. no further debate necessary. game over."

And still the anonymous likes of you always manages to be here to take time out of your busy, busy day to tell me just that.

What a guy.

Tell ya what, little fella. Go back and tally up all the posts I've made and all the "anonymous" posts and see which is the greater number.

Take your time. You're not going anywhere.

Always a pleasure.

# Posted by:

JWCoop10 | 3:01 PM, January 03, 2008

bubba said...

"I hope you all read poop's letter in the Times-Argus. Just what is it that those "Christians" have done to you, little fella? Something in the past, maybe? hmmmmmm."

Well, bubbles, given the fact that those of us residing in the Reality-Based Community tend to live in the moment which kinda precludes me from spending much time in the future and the fact that I'm once again schoolin' your sorry butt as we speak leaves the present kinda spoken for, too, it'd kinda have to be now wouldn't it, little fella?

So, that said, I'll ask you again, precisely what is it you're trying to say, bubbles?

That's what I thought.

Dismissed.

# Posted by:

JWCoop10 | 3:16 PM, January 03, 2008

nonymous said...

"Two wrongs don't make a right, Bubba."

While I certainly agree with your sentiment, nevertheless, it presumes an original wrong which has yet to be established leaving your point rather moot in this case, dontcha think?

"If a Christian has been attacked because of his religion, that's wrong."

Again, what Christian has been wronged here?

# Posted by:

JWCoop10 | 3:23 PM, January 03, 2008

Anonymous said...

"A couple of thoughts (as a former legislator):

Really? When? For how long? What Legislative District?

If I were to look up anonymous in the history of the Vermont Legislature, how long would it take me to find your sorry anonymous butt, mein herr "anonymous"?

That said, is it your contention, mein herr, that Staff is going to work for free?

Good luck.

If this nebulous, amorphous Staff of which you speak makes as much or more than the Legislators they serve and will be forced to fully brief at length at a later date so they can cast an informed vote on behalf of the constituents they serve, then where are the savings to the State?

# Posted by:

JWCoop10 | 3:38 PM, January 03, 2008

STFU

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 3:46 PM, January 03, 2008

Oh Christ. Nobody cares. We just want to have a conversation without scrolling through 20 comments by the same dipspit who has nothing to say.

You aren't that important, buddy.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 4:24 PM, January 03, 2008

Anonymous said...

"STFU"

Gee, that's awfully succinct for you, little fella. What's the matter, the lack of facts cat got your tongue?

That's never stopped you before.

# Posted by:

JWCoop10 | 4:26 PM, January 03, 2008

Anonymous said...

"Oh Christ. Nobody cares. We just want to have a conversation without scrolling through 20 comments by the same dipspit who has nothing to say."

Once again, who is this "we" for whom you presume to speak, little fella? Bubba and the Anonymettes?

"You aren't that important, buddy."

Your lips say non but your posts say oui, mon petite homme.

I've 7 weeks of your nitwit nonsense tellin' me just how little you think, care and give a damn about me, little fella.

Like the slop you posted before I got here and the slop you'll post when I'm gone, they sure don't say much else.

Always a pleasure.

# Posted by:

JWCoop10 | 4:39 PM, January 03, 2008

Anonymous said...

"Brock could beat Welch. Welch keeps voting to fund the war and he said he would get us out of there."

So, you're basing your contention that Brock could beat Welch on the fact that the only measurable criticism Peter Welch has received to date is that he's not suitably Anti-War and Anti-Bush enough to suit some Vermonters and in a fit of pique, they'll turn to a Pro-War, Pro-Bush, former one-term-and-out Gop Vermont State Auditor with an ethical cloud or two hangin' over his head, vote Gop, and cut off enough of their nose to spite their face thereby allowing said former one-term and outta here, Gop State Auditor with the ethical cloud or two to slide on in, eh, little fella?

You must think Anthony Pollina's following is even bigger than Anthony Pollina does, little fella.

You should resolve to get yourself some help this year, little fella. Pronto.

Always a pleasure.

# Posted by:

JWCoop10 | 5:26 PM, January 03, 2008

ofuhchrissake, jwpoop, could you at least post your repostes on the thread to which they belong? The above post belongs on a different thread. Ya so eager to post your lil' pointed responses that ya pay no attention to where they belong?

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 7:30 PM, January 03, 2008

Go cheney yourself , mon ami

# Posted by:

JWCoop10 | 7:35 PM, January 03, 2008

"I hope you all read poop's letter in the Times-Argus. Just what is it that those "Christians" have done to you, little fella? Something in the past, maybe? hmmmmmm."

What? Ya mean jwcoop is Jeff Cooper of Montpelier, Vermont?

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 7:50 PM, January 03, 2008

jwcoop10 = Jeff Cooper from Montpelier....

...who cares. a rose is a rose is a rose.

Under either name, he remains the same.... a lonely old little man with nothing to do all day long but prove how obnoxious he can be

Who cares.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 7:10 AM, January 04, 2008

And now the shrew has come in 3d in Iowa - time to deflate your Hillary doll, jw, and maybe take all of those pictures down in your furnished room.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 8:10 AM, January 04, 2008

bubba said...

"And now the shrew has come in 3d in Iowa - time to deflate your Hillary doll, jw, and maybe take all of those pictures down in your furnished room."

Once again, bubbles, you prove yourself to be wrong on all counts.

Feel free to cite just where and when I claimed to be a Hillary supporter, sport.

The bottom line is that all of the Top 3 Dem Candidates did significantly better than Huckabee.

Then again, that's bound to happen when a Red State Bush carried twice had over 200 thousand Dems and Independents come out and trounce "Fox Noise Channel Amerika" by a 2-1 margin.

Get used to it, little fella. It's only gonna get worse for you loons.

Always a pleasure.

# Posted by:

JWCoop10 | 8:39 AM, January 04, 2008

I agree Coop. America seems to waking up from its seven-year slumber. If only Vermonters would awake with the rest of the country and get rid of Doesless and his band of hacks.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 9:49 AM, January 04, 2008

Spoken like a 100% communist either living off daddy's inheritance, or the taxpayers of Vermont.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 11:58 AM, January 04, 2008

Governor Douglas said. “I will always put progress ahead of partisanship.”

what a joke...

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 12:30 PM, January 04, 2008

bubba said...

"Spoken like a 100% communist either living off daddy's inheritance, or the taxpayers of Vermont."

Spoken like an unpatriotic neo-nazi nitwit with nothing to say who makes bogus accusations he can't prove or substantiate in any way shape or form.

Always a pleasure.

# Posted by:

JWCoop10 | 12:47 PM, January 04, 2008

Bubba and jwcoop - please go on vacation somewhere!

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 3:29 PM, January 04, 2008

jwpoop, shut up.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 8:48 PM, January 04, 2008

Anonymous said...

"jwpoop, shut up."

Not a chance, nitwit. Not a chance.

Get yourself some facts and somethin' to say. Unless and until you prove you can pull that off, I'm gonna be here to shred every grain of gop-slop nonsense you dredge up and leave your head by the side of the door.

It's been fun.

# Posted by:

JWCoop10 | 12:49 AM, January 05, 2008

Anonymous said...

"Bubba and jwcoop - please go on vacation somewhere!"

Anonymous, nitwit, please stop whining and get yourself some stones, some brains and something to say.

Dismissed.

# Posted by:

JWCoop10 | 1:10 AM, January 05, 2008

"JWCoop10 said... "Get yourself some facts and somethin' to say. "

JW, take some of your own advice. In 7 weeks you haven't offered a single fact or a comment that has been remotely lucid.

"Nice-try nitwit", "oh ya little fella" and "go Cheney yourself" aren't facts in the real world....maybe at the Jethro Bodine School of Higher Learning but not in the real world.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 8:32 AM, January 05, 2008

This comment has been removed by the author.

# Posted by:

JWCoop10 | 4:59 PM, January 05, 2008

Anonymous said...

"JW, take some of your own advice."

Gee, thanks, little fella, but given a choice between mine and the quality of yours, I really don't have much of an alternative.

Still, thanks, little fella. It's the attempt at thought that counts.

"In 7 weeks you haven't offered a single fact or a comment that has been remotely lucid."

In other words, it's PG-17, over your head and you're not accompanied by an adult.

Tough Break, little man.

I'll try to keep the three syllable words to a minimum for your benefit.

"Nice-try nitwit", "oh ya little fella" and "go Cheney yourself" aren't facts in the real world"

No, not in and of themselves they're not. However, they're more than sufficient responses for anything you and bubbles have been able to cough up. In fact, when stacked up against your slop, they're pretty damned erudite considering the circumstances.

Nice try.

Feel free to demonstrate just where the arguments, positions and points of view advanced by the coalition of the clueless likes of you and bubbles are gettin' much if any traction in this far-off, mythical "real world" of which you speak, little fella.

Will there be orks, sorcerers, wizards and a ring making an appearance in the next chapter or two.

I gotta tell ya, dild'oh baggins, a beautiful princess or two couldn't hurt this little yarn of yours, sport.

C'mon. Pick up the pace. More yarn, less yawn. Dazzle me, little dude. You're puttin' me to sleep, here.

# Posted by:

JWCoop10 | 5:05 PM, January 05, 2008

""In 7 weeks you haven't offered a single fact or a comment that has been remotely lucid."
In other words, it's PG-17, over your head and you're not accompanied by an adult."

Uh, no. In 7 weeks you haven't offered a single fact or a comment that has been remotely lucid. End of story.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 5:46 PM, January 05, 2008

Anonymous said...
""In 7 weeks you haven't offered a single fact or a comment that has been remotely lucid."
In other words, it's PG-17, over your head and you're not accompanied by an adult."

"Uh, no. In 7 weeks you haven't offered a single fact or a comment that has been remotely lucid. End of story."

That's some story, alright, little fella.

Run along.

# Posted by:

JWCoop10 | 7:32 PM, January 05, 2008

This is another reader that thinks you two should take a break.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 10:16 AM, January 06, 2008

Yeah, I think "anonymous" should take a break, too.

So, that said, that leaves me, bubbles and.......?

# Posted by:

JWCoop10 | 11:15 AM, January 06, 2008

Is there anyone on this blog that believes JW is sufficiently worthy of any explanation or "proof" he demands? Somewhere I must have missed that he is the supreme being on this blog whose approval and praises we should beg for.

JW, get a clue. Opinion is just that, opinion. BTW the garbage you spew....opinion, nothing more.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 1:32 PM, January 06, 2008

Anonymous has left a new comment on the post "Citizen legislature in jeopardy?":

"Is there anyone on this blog that believes JW is sufficiently worthy of any explanation or "proof" he demands?"

Gee, 4 hours and no takers, little anonymous nitwit. Even I thought one on your imaginary, invisible and equally-anonymous little friends or alter egos would come to your aid by now.

In other words, little fella's got bupkis to the 10th power.

"Somewhere I must have missed that he is the supreme being on this blog whose approval and praises we should beg for."

Ya must've left that in the same pants pocket as your non-existent evidence, little fella.

"JW, get a clue. Opinion is just that, opinion. BTW the garbage you spew....opinion, nothing more."

Nice try, little anonymous nitwit. It's just another item on the list of things you couldn't substantiate or prove before I got here, you can't substantiate or prove now and you won't be able to substantiate or prove when I'm gone.

You can be like Rudy. You can run unopposed and lose.

Rest easy, anonymous, little fella. If you knew you're sorry butt from your elbow, ya wouldn't be you.

Always a pleasure.

# Posted by:

JWCoop10 | 5:36 PM, January 06, 2008

Ah, yes, jw makes more new friends today.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 7:21 PM, January 06, 2008

Jeb Spaulding for Governor.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 10:23 PM, January 06, 2008

But he is really a Republican!

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 9:40 AM, January 07, 2008

Anonymous said...

"Ah, yes, jw makes more new friends today."

I'm not in the market for anonymous imaginary, invisible little friends, my anonymous, imaginary, invisible little friend.

Try the house across the street with the dogs. They're real friendly once ya get to know 'em.

Always a pleasure.

# Posted by:

JWCoop10 | 12:12 PM, January 07, 2008

Spaulding does seem darn friendly with our Gov.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 3:33 PM, January 07, 2008

"But he is really a Republican!"

Ah, yes. Any Democrat whom you don't deem to be sufficiently socialist must really be a Republican?

Dope.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 7:31 PM, January 07, 2008

Keep those eyes open.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 9:02 PM, January 07, 2008

"Spaulding does seem darn friendly with our Gov."

And that means . . . what? That he's no longer a Democrat and now eats children?

Could it be that when a Democrat gets a responsible job -- like guarding the state's money -- their prespective changes a little? Sorta like Dean's no-nonsense attitude when he was the Gov. of Vermont?

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 8:45 AM, January 08, 2008

Jeb...............

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 8:48 AM, January 08, 2008

Anonymous said...
"But he is really a Republican!"

"Ah, yes. Any Democrat whom you don't deem to be sufficiently socialist must really be a Republican?"

Where'd he say that, little anonymous fella?

# Posted by:

JWCoop10 | 7:27 AM, January 09, 2008