vt.Buzz ~ a political blog

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

1.31.2008

Live from governor's office

Here's a shot of the newest Statehouse videographer, Jason Gibbs, filming today's news conference.

As you may have read, the governor's office has taken over videotaping the governor's news conferences instead of contracting that work out. This will save $10,000 this year, Gibbs said.
Instead of telling the governor that that's all the time we have at the end of the news conferences, Gibbs will be able to say, that's all the film we have. (Yeah, I know it's not film, per se, but you get the idea).

Here's the gist of what the governor had to say today:

- Doesn't like the new border ID rules that took effect today.

- Thinks the lobbyist he's no longer going to hire in Washington (again, to save money) was helpful. For example, he helped arrange Douglas' appearance before a Senate committee over the auto emissions. Considering that Sen. Bernie Sanders serves on that committee I would have guessed Sanders' office arranged it. Maybe the two aren't that close after all.

- Doesn't think legalizing the growing of hemp should be a legislative priority, (a bill is headed to the House floor) as the feds don't allow it anyway.

- Would love a four-year term but accepts that he may not get it.
Depending on Jason's videography skills, you'll be able to catch it all on your local public access channel soon.

- Terri Hallenbeck

posted by vt.Buzz | 4:46 PM |

Comments:

Finally, a role Gibbs can fulfill. Things are really looking up for him.

$60,000 to help set up a hearing? Where do I sign up? Douglas is just giving our money away.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 4:56 PM, January 31, 2008

Re 4-year term:

Where is the public demand for this change in the constitution? The proposal seems to be supported only by Montpelier-Burlington insiders (M. Kunin, J. Douglas, Snelling Center and its corporate funders), but lacks grass-roots support.

The Vermont public cares about school finance and property taxes, access to and cost of health care, and energy and environmental issues. All these are much more important issues for the legislature to be considering than four-year terms, especially when some legislators want to get four-year terms for themselves along with the state-wide offices.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 7:50 PM, January 31, 2008

Agreed! First marijuana, now four-year terms (oh, and that little issue about no money). It's really not a grand start. I blame the exec and legis branches equally. Time to start acting on at least one issue important to mainstream Vermonters. Is there a committee to discuss the reality of legislating an issue Vermonters care about? Who's the chair? I'd like to testify.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 8:58 PM, January 31, 2008

There's another reason why Douglas probably didn't renew the lobbying contract with Dutko. Dutko has been well-connected with the Mitt Romney presidential campaign. Ron Kaufman, the chairman of Dutko's executive committee

http://www.dutkoworldwide.com/professionals/ron_kaufman/

has been traveling around the country on Romney's plane, giving him political advice. Romney blew up at Glen Johnson of the AP, formerly of the Boston Globe, when Johnson asked Romney about this a few weeks ago, after Romney said there were no lobbyists on his campaign. Formally, Kaufman is not on the Romney campaign payroll, but he is certainly someone whose political advice Romney takes seriously.

Well, the Mittster's not going to be elected the next president, so there's not much value for Vermont to be represented in Washington by a "Romney firm." If McCain pulls an upset and is elected in November, Douglas will have great access to the White House, since he endorsed McCain before the NH primary. If Clinton or Obama is elected president, Vermont's interests will be very well represented by Pat Leahy, Bernie Sanders, and Peter Welch, especially if Obama is the next president.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 9:09 PM, January 31, 2008

Anonymous said...

"....Well, the Mittster's not going to be elected the next president, so there's not much value for Vermont to be represented in Washington by a "Romney firm." If McCain pulls an upset and is elected in November, Douglas will have great access to the White House, since he endorsed McCain before the NH primary....."

Doogie Chaired Shrub's Reelection Campaign, too. How's that worked out for Vermont?

While McCain bears greater resemblance to an intelligent, decent human being than shrub does, that's not saying a whole hell of a lot.

The fact remains that his greatest issue is prolonging a War we were deliberately lied into by the current regime and at least 70 percent of the Country wants us out of.

McCain may be a decent guy as gops go. Given the fact that ignorant trash like comedian rush limbaugh and the gop establishment hate his guts, that's probably true. Nevertheless, he's still a gop and nothing good comes of gops with power.

# Posted by:

JWCoop10 | 12:07 PM, February 01, 2008

There you go again - "Bush lied us into a war". If believing faulty intelligence made possible by the left's weakening of our intelligence ability (i.e., Jaime Gorelick, Clinton admin., for one example)is lying, then I guess 75% of the Dimocrats in Washington including Leahy are also guilty. It's sort of like the difference between you and Hoffer - Hoffer offers faulty evidence while you strictly lie.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 12:52 PM, February 01, 2008

Bush did lie us into war. How can you deny that?

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 12:57 PM, February 01, 2008

How do you prove he did lie?

Like it or not the intelligence was influenced by the lies Sadaam was telling the World as he told his interrogators.

In the recent 60 Minutes interview (that is the left-leaning CBS News organization) reported the following facts:

According to this 60 Minutes piece, Sadaam confirmed the following facts:

1. At one time Sadaam did possess weapons of mass destruction.
2. Even after the supposed destruction of the WMDs, Sadamm continued to maintain the impression that Iraq was still in possession of WMDs.
3. Sadaam personally approved the use of WMDs on his own people and saw their deaths as “necessary”.
4. Sadaam fully intended to reconstitute his WMD program and maintained the appropriate personnel to do so.

If you have facts that show the lie serve them up but I think it is Sadaam's lie that has caused people to die.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 1:58 PM, February 01, 2008

The dims think if you repeat a lie often enough, people will believe it. (Like how Vermont is really a low-tax paradise for working people) This is why, with few exceptions, they are a party lacking in principles, morals, and the ability to tell the truth. Just look at parts of the U.S. where they have had total domination of the political process for so long and look at the result - Detroit, Washington D.C., Newark, Philadelphia, New York City (pre-Guiliani), Gary, Baltimore, Vermont, and you get my point. Gee, wasn't it just 8 or 9 short years ago when almost every member of the dims were blubbering about how we had to get Sadam and his weapons of mass destruction?

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 2:11 PM, February 01, 2008

"Bush did lie us into war. How can you deny that?"

I agree. But Democrats (including one of the two current Presidential candidates) knew the intelligence was faulty or doctored and went along with the war -- because it was "popular" at the time.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 2:27 PM, February 01, 2008

"Ya had no answer then, ya got no answer now and you'll have no evidence tomorrow"

Hey grammar critic, you forgot the serial comma after "answer now."

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 2:32 PM, February 01, 2008

"nothing good comes of gops with power."

Right. As opposed to Democrats with power like, say, Boss Tweed, Huey Long, George Wallace, Richard Daley, Sr., Edwin Edwards, etc.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 2:45 PM, February 01, 2008

"your little nameless brokebrain mountain side kick"

Ah, yes. Yet another curious reference by jw to a movie about two gay guys. He's really got a thing about that . . .

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 2:46 PM, February 01, 2008

JW said:

"..Gee, wasn't it just 8 or 9 short years ago when almost every member of the dims were blubbering about how we had to get Sadam and his weapons of mass destruction?"

No.

Dismissed."

Ahhh...Revisionism at its finest.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 3:18 PM, February 01, 2008

Fascinating that the first time we have a blog entry where JW's comments are purely on topic, various anonymous types feel compelled to nudge him into personal backs and forths. Quoting him from prior diaries? How obsessed are you people?

Jim Douglas and John McCain? Now there's an odd couple. Somehow I don't think Jim is going to have a lot of nights in the Lincoln bedroom.

Of course, I don't think McCain is going to win, either.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 7:16 PM, February 01, 2008

Mr. Charming strikes again.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 6:33 AM, February 02, 2008

JW said: "Give it up, punk. Shrub attacked Iran for no good reason. "

Attacked Iran?

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 8:03 AM, February 02, 2008

JW, not to back up but, why are CBS reported stories in Iraq any less credible than the CNN archived stories you provide to support your alledged claim of S. Thurmond raping his domestic?

Oh yeah..it's because you say it's so and we all know you are the one consulted by all heads of state on all matters no matter how large or small.

Thanks for sharing your first hand knowledge. Idiot.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 8:10 AM, February 02, 2008

Anonymous said...

"JW, not to back up but, why are CBS reported stories in Iraq any less credible than the CNN archived stories you provide to support your alledged claim of S. Thurmond raping his domestic?"

"Oh yeah..it's because you say it's so and we all know you are the one consulted by all heads of state on all matters no matter how large or small."

Nah, it's more a question of your long, well-established inability to make a case and support your ignorant, ill-informed, bogus accusations with any factual evidence and just generally demonstrating that you don't know what the folk you're talking about on a wide range of subjects.

"Thanks for sharing your first hand knowledge. Idiot."

You're welcome, Idiot. Always happy to help the factually-challenged.

Oh, thanks for pointing out that Iraq/Iran typo.

Bush attacked Iraq for no good reason. He wants to attack Iran for no good reason.

Always a pleasure.

# Posted by:

JWCoop10 | 8:33 AM, February 02, 2008

"He wants to attack Iran for no good reason."

Proof please...is this from your insider's knowledge?

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 8:54 AM, February 02, 2008

"Bush attacked Iraq for no good reason. He wants to attack Iran for no good reason."

What about the World Trade Center...an inside job?

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 9:06 AM, February 02, 2008

Share more with us JW...

How about the Federal Reserve Conspiracy? Are the Federal Reserve System and the bankers who own stock in Federal Reserve banks key elements in a grand conspiracy among a few elite to control the world? Do they hold a plan of an illegal secret conspiracy aimed at controlling the Nation's money and credit policies in order to virtually dictate the course of events -- to start wars, to induce recessions and depressions, and to create money and debt -- all of which would enhance the power of and increase the profits of the manipulators in charge?

And how about the Trilateral Commission? Tell us about that too oh great one.

Please JW let us know.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 9:14 AM, February 02, 2008

Anonymous said...

"Bush attacked Iraq for no good reason. He wants to attack Iran for no good reason."

Evidently, even you've seen the utter futility of arguing against those facts, little I haven't got a leg to stand on and couldn't buy a fact, so I'll try to change the subject and hope nobody notices fella.

Nice try, I noticed and ya still haven't got a leg to stand on and couldn't buy a fact, little fella.

"What about the World Trade Center...an inside job?"

Nice try. If you've got evidence of me saying that, cough it up, 'cause I'd just love to see it, little you're fooked no matter where ya turn fella.

Always a pleasure.

9:06 AM

# Posted by:

JWCoop10 | 12:49 PM, February 02, 2008

Anonymous said...

"He wants to attack Iran for no good reason."

Proof please...is this from your insider's knowledge?"

Nah, it's from followin' the news, knowin' the facts, which end is up and what day it is.

You coalition of the clueless cretins should try it some time.

Always a pleasure.

# Posted by:

JWCoop10 | 12:54 PM, February 02, 2008

Fox News rules JW...try it some time. Maybe you will learn what fair and balanced means

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 2:09 PM, February 02, 2008

"Fox News rules JW...try it some time. Maybe you will learn what fair and balanced means"

Yeah, fixed news ain't it.

# Posted by:

JWCoop10 | 2:21 PM, February 02, 2008

"He wants to attack Iran for no good reason."

Prove it, little fella.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 2:38 PM, February 02, 2008

Read the State of the Union. His comments on Iran echo those made about Iraq prior to the invasion. Then think about it.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 3:00 PM, February 02, 2008

"Read the State of the Union. His comments on Iran echo those made about Iraq prior to the invasion. Then think about it."

So, you "infer" that he wants to attack Iran?

"Echo"?

Sorry, you're going to have to do better than that on the evidence thing.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 5:16 PM, February 02, 2008

Wait a while. See who's right.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 5:50 PM, February 02, 2008

How long do we wait to test your theory?

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 7:47 PM, February 02, 2008

"Any time somebody calls him on his horsebrit hume, he cuts their mic.
Like the Judge said when he tossed the nuisance suit him and ruppert brought against Al Franken, bubble boy, you're totally without merit, both factually and legally."

Oh this again. The "Billo and Judge" thing. Blah, blah, billo, blah, blah, like he said, blah, blah, case dismissed, blah, blah, blah.

This must be keystroke #5 on your predictable playlist of keystrokes 1-5.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 8:03 PM, February 02, 2008

"How long should we wait..." Well, he's got until the rest of this year to accomplish his goal.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 1:48 PM, February 03, 2008

JW feebly said: "Ya got nothing to say and you've been saying it far too loudly for far too long and I'm gonna keep calling your ignorant, ill-informed, factually-challenged, knuckle-draggin nitwit ass on it as long as the spirit moves me to do so..."

Interesting comment by JW but once again misdirected. JW you have not offered one substatntiated fact since day 1 on this board. When challenged to do so you haven't. You have nothing to say. That is obvious. You have no life. That too is entirely obvious. No one cares to hear about the things your Grandma taught you. At least from my perspective I am tired of your infantile behavior and gutter language. Do us all a favor, go spew you trash somewhere else.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 1:49 PM, February 03, 2008

Hear, hear.

Signed, everyone.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 2:54 PM, February 03, 2008

Gee, thanks little nameless-nitwit, factually-challenged, knuckle-draggin', fraudulent fellas!

Just knowin' you feel so strongly about my presence here is all the encouragement I'll ever need to stick around and look out for your ignorant, ill-informed asses.

Always a pleasure.

# Posted by:

JWCoop10 | 3:11 PM, February 03, 2008

jw predictably said: "Like I keep tellin' ya, little nameless-nitwit, factually-challenged, fraudulent fella, you can compile highlight packages of my stuff 'til the cows come home, I know what I said, who I said it to and why."

It's not for you nitwit. It is a public service for all other readers on this board. Anon's recap allows us to review the essence of every post you have ever made in a quick Cliff Notes fashion. I for one appreciate the recap allowing me to get my daily fix of your lunancy without having to read paragraph after paragraph of the garbage you spew.

As you have apparently not gotten it yet, do you realize the world's opinion of you? Please go hangout on the Bill Maher blog...or has he blocked you there?

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 4:33 PM, February 03, 2008

JW said: "Moreover, this is not your board. It is not your place to tell me to go or stay. "

Free speech applies to JW. However, not to anyone else on this board as COOP's routine to to shout it down crudely.

It may not be the place of any one person to tell you to go but certainly no one will miss you. Go hang some place people actually want you.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 5:02 PM, February 03, 2008

JW, do you have anything to offer the world other than your standard list of vile insults?

You bring no value. Get over yourself. No one will engage in a normal conversation with an oaf like you. Don't you get it? Three months now and all anyone is inclined to do is trade insults with you. You seem to find great joy in that. Most everyone else outgrew that type of behavior in the 4th grade. Grandma didn't homeschool you very well in the manners department.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 7:17 AM, February 04, 2008

"So, either make better arguments with some basis in fact or get used to it, 'cause I enjoy kickin' your ignorant asses around."

You haven't made an argument since you got here.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 7:21 AM, February 04, 2008

"You bring no value. Get over yourself."

The immortal words of Mr. T seem to apply to the Coop-meister: "Pity the Fool".

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 7:35 AM, February 04, 2008

"No "real" Vermonter is as dim as you."

You say that when you are a Vermont Transplant yourself. Tell us; are you superior or inferior to Vermonters?

Go stand in line moron line please.

What a hypocrite.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 12:42 PM, February 04, 2008

Apparently Woodschmuk is not from this planet. Probably got dropped off the space ship along with Kucinich. Hey, let's hear about Al Franken again, moron!

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 2:41 PM, February 04, 2008

JW proudly proclaims: "My wife's a native Vermonter. So are our sons. They're all smarter than me."

Actually a box of rocks is smarter than you.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 3:17 PM, February 04, 2008

Anonymous said...

"JW proudly proclaims: "My wife's a native Vermonter. So are our sons. They're all smarter than me."

Yeah, they are.

"Actually a box of rocks is smarter than you."

You're not.

Which leaves you totally screwed, little idiot fella.

Always a pleasure.

# Posted by:

JWCoop10 | 11:24 PM, February 04, 2008

Oh yeah? Did you say that with your tongue sticking out?

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 7:26 AM, February 05, 2008

Notice all the postings that have been removed?

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 6:37 PM, February 05, 2008

Anonymous said...

"Notice all the postings that have been removed?"

Nah, once ya get past my stuff, it's pretty much all nameless-nitwit nonsense, little fella.

Always a pleasure.

# Posted by:

JWCoop10 | 9:48 PM, February 05, 2008

Notice all the postings that have been removed?

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 6:44 PM, February 06, 2008

Anonymous said...

"Bush did lie us into war. How can you deny that?"

"I agree. But Democrats (including one of the two current Presidential candidates) knew the intelligence was faulty or doctored and went along with the war -- because it was "popular" at the time."

And your evidence to support this slop is..............?

No, they didn't. They saw what Cheney wanted them to see.

# Posted by:

JWCoop10 | 11:05 AM, February 07, 2008

Anonymous said...

"JW, not to back up but, why are CBS reported stories in Iraq any less credible than the CNN archived stories you provide to support your alledged claim of S. Thurmond raping his domestic?"

For like the 37th time, little idiot fella, the facts of the Strom Story are not in dispute.
The Clinton story's are.

Moreover, simply saying she inched closer to saying something doesn't alter the fact that she hasn't said it, little fella.

It's got nothing to do with the news outlet in this case.

"Oh yeah..it's because you say it's so and we all know you are the one consulted by all heads of state on all matters no matter how large or small."

That's sweet of you to say, little idiot fella, but it's more an issue of the likes of you and bubbles not making a case, having no evidence to support the case you've invariably failed to make and knowing what the hell you're talking about.

Always a pleasure.

# Posted by:

JWCoop10 | 11:41 AM, February 07, 2008

"No, they didn't."

Yes, they did.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 3:19 PM, February 07, 2008