vt.Buzz ~ a political blog

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

1.23.2008

Two takes

Peter Galbraith took a field trip to the Statehouse yesterday. Escorted by Democratic Party Chairman Ian Carleton and Executive Director Jill Krowinski, he met the cast of Democratic state legislators.

He spoke to the Democratic caucus just before Gov. Jim Douglas gave his budget address. In that speech, Galbraith blamed the Republicans, Douglas included, for the current state of economic affairs, noting the plunging stock markets.

"At home and abroad, we are surely reaping what we have sowed with the Republican policies of the last eight years."

An hour later, Douglas was taking credit for the fact that Vermont is not in as dire a financial situation as other states.

"Five years ago - as I stood at this podium to deliver my first budget address - Vermont was mired near the bottom of a global economic slowdown. Our economy had stalled, our government had overpromised and Vermonters were demanding a change from business as usual.

Together, we took immediate action to spur job creation, focus on affordability, resist tax increases and restrain spending. ... We emerged from that slump a stronger state - with more Vermonters working than ever before, with poverty down, with health care for more families and with opportunities for our people more bountiful than ever."

Which is it, then?

- Terri Hallenbeck

posted by vt.Buzz | 10:30 AM |

Comments:

Just imagine the U.S. if Jim Douglas's chosen candidate hadn't lied his way to war and cost all of us billions upon billions. Vermont has historically received a higher than normal amount of federal monies, but that well is drying up quickly, again thanks to Jim Douglas's chosen candidate. Maybe Jim Douglas shouldn't have waited so long to finally start challenging his chosen candidate, who he shopped around to Vermonters twice, telling us GW was a great man. Oh, what the hell. At least Douglas got to stay at the White House and fawn all over his chosen candidate.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 12:11 PM, January 23, 2008

"...Vermont has historically received a higher than normal amount of federal monies, but that well is drying up quickly"

Don't you get it that's the issue with public giveaways. They eventually dry up and you never really learned how to stand on your own.

The bigger issue is what are we doing to develop a robust VT economy that can pay for all the programs it has already approved. Our outstanding liability is huge and our state revenue stream is weak.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 12:32 PM, January 23, 2008

"...you never really learned how to stand on your own"

And is there any state that has learned to stand on its own yet? The answer is "no" because this is, you'll remember, the United States. We created this national democracy with a federal gov't that, in part, is supposed to assist states with many of the specific programs that have been approved. That was the idea. Now Bush has thrown all of our surplus and prosperity down the toilet and states are left holding the bag.

If you can name a state that's been able to do it on its own since 1776, please tell...

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 12:44 PM, January 23, 2008

Please stop your wretched whining, jerk. Vermont has become such a stinking ward of the rest of the country that it can't do anything but bitch when we hit a momentary bump in the economy. Maybe it's about time to show a little responsibility and start running the state the way it was before all of you trustfunders arrived, every one wanting to be the last flatlander!

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 12:54 PM, January 23, 2008

"The bigger issue is what are we doing to develop a robust VT economy that can pay for all the programs it has already approved."

You mean like roads and plow trucks?

Crumbling roads are the biggest problem area of our budget.

I guess we should "stand on our own" to fix them. Each of us should go out and rebuild a bridge.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 1:16 PM, January 23, 2008

Bubba's right.

We should run this state like Bush runs the White House.

Money is no object. Spend, spend, spend.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 1:18 PM, January 23, 2008

"I guess we should "stand on our own" to fix them. Each of us should go out and rebuild a bridge."

Typical P/D response. Wise guy answer but nothing of substance that can be implemented.

Does Mom still give you your weekly allowance?

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 1:37 PM, January 23, 2008

The Legislature should spend next week debating whether to impeach Bush and Cheney. Dennis Kucinich will be introducing an impeachment resolution in the House next Monday, the same day Bush gives his State of the Union speech.

http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/01/23/kucinich-starts-new-impeachment-drive/

Shumlin can't let Kucinich upstage him, can he? Besides, why talk about property taxes or the state budget in Montpelier if you can talk about impeachment instead?

Where do Pollina and Galbraith stand on impeachment?

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 2:00 PM, January 23, 2008

Being the far left nitwits that they both are, GUESS!

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 2:06 PM, January 23, 2008

Maybe Jim Douglas, Mike Smith, Jason Gibbs, Tim Hayward(insert any/all additional fifth floor names here)and their good friend John McClaughry can start housing Vermont's severely mentally ill citizens in their homes. The Ethan Allen Institute thinks community based is the way to go. Why not start at the top? Help us relieve the taxpayer burden Mr. Governor and Mr. Ethan Allen Very Lite. While you're at it, why not open your homes to Vermont's non-violent offenders?

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 2:20 PM, January 23, 2008

Remember, Bill Clinton left a $127 billion surplus and paid down hundreds of billions of dollars in federal debt -- proving that Democrats are fiscally responsible.

No Republican president has ballanced a budget in the past 60 years.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 2:55 PM, January 23, 2008

"Which is it, then?"

It's an election year, so it's both.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 3:30 PM, January 23, 2008

Just two months ago, he was declaring Vermont unaffordable, without jobs or businesses, with high poverty, and with no opportunity.

Alot sure has happened in two months.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 3:33 PM, January 23, 2008

Hey Vermont! Diamond Jimmy D. here with my little sidekick Mikey "Jackpot" Smith. We're inviting every Vermonter to come on over to our Lottery Palace and spend what little money you have on our wicked good games of chance. Every dollar you spend is another 75 cents for our "friends (wink, wink)" on Wall Street and in Atlantic City. Your money is our future. No, seriously...it really is.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 4:35 PM, January 23, 2008

"Remember, Bill Clinton left a $127 billion surplus and paid down hundreds of billions of dollars in federal debt -- proving that Democrats are fiscally responsible."

How soon you forget that it was a Republican controlled House and Senate that forced Billy Boy to create that surplus and pay down the debt.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 5:06 PM, January 23, 2008

The only reason there was a balanced budget was the threat of a constitutional amendment which forced Slick Willie to back down on his spending plans.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 5:35 PM, January 23, 2008

By the way, jw, you forgot to mention the 10 confirmed opportunities missed by Slick Willie to take out Bin Laden. Just think, boy idiot, if Willie hadn't been so busy groping interns and Ms. Albright had even one half of a brain, there would have been NO 9/11!!! Stop me if I'm over your pointy little head again.

You sure got me with those foreign words again.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 6:03 PM, January 23, 2008

Bubba,

Just to save JW the effort of another posting (because after all we certainly know this board keeps him busy), let me ask...do you have any proof that Slick Willie didn't take our Bin Laden because he was groping the interns?

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 6:16 PM, January 23, 2008

DUH....Does the name "Monica" ring some sort of bell? (At least you didn't ask me for proof re: Madeleine's intelligence, or lack thereof.)

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 6:44 PM, January 23, 2008

This comment has been removed by the author.

# Posted by:

JWCoop10 | 9:32 PM, January 23, 2008

Excuse me while I pay a homeless man to kick me in the eye with his hobo boot. If my next post seems to heavily involve tin cans, the bastard stole my keys and left me for dead. Call the police. I don't want him to eating the last Toaster Strudel. I've got ten icing packets stored in my pillowcase; I cannot stress how important that is.*

*Very.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 9:44 PM, January 23, 2008

"..let me ask...do you have any proof that Slick Willie didn't take our Bin Laden because he was groping the interns?"

In other words, little nameless neo-nazi nitwit fella, you want me to disprove something you have no proof of.

Duh, jw. This poster was directing his question to Bubba and was taking the same side as you. Of course, you didn't get that. What a surprise. Launch 360 degree attack first, ask questions later.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 10:24 PM, January 23, 2008

Now the moron is even turning on his (only) acolyte! No wonder Doug Hoffer doesn't return his calls.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 6:28 AM, January 24, 2008

The 10:35PM post prompt a scary thought. Does anyone wonder: (a)what JW's kids are like and (b) what it is like being JW's kids?

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 6:59 AM, January 24, 2008

I doubt that JW is cleaver enough to figure out how to reproduce.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 9:03 AM, January 24, 2008

Can you imagine what jw could possibly do for some kind of gainful employment? Not too much call for farm dubs in Vermont anymore. Maybe the "before" in a drug-intervention ad? Actually, he probably lives off an inheritance (trust fund) or works for VPIRG. Or plays air guitar in the Church Street marketplace?

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 9:28 AM, January 24, 2008

Jim Douglas and Michael Smith combined earn over $250,000 per year. Might they not want to consider freezing their pay as a show of being in the trenches with average Vermonters? Who am I kidding? These two will milk it for every penny. The ever expanding 5th floor crew (recent addition of AHS woman. why? no one knows)should also have their pay frozen, or reduce the size. Again, who am I kidding?

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 10:06 AM, January 24, 2008

"Does anyone wonder: (a)what JW's kids are like and (b) what it is like being JW's kids?"

ahh.... a psychologist's dream

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 1:04 PM, January 24, 2008

"People who did not pay federal income taxes but who had earned income of more than $3,000 would get checks of $300 per individual or $600 per couple."

Bizarre

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 1:16 PM, January 24, 2008

"Does anyone wonder: (a)what JW's kids are like and (b) what it is like being JW's kids?"

ahh.... a psychologist's dream
_______________________________

And a corrections officer's nightmare.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 1:36 PM, January 24, 2008

Bush had proposed a higher rebate for those that PAID taxes but had to compromise with the lefties and agree to ALSO pay $300 to the wards of the state. Oh well, what else is new.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 2:40 PM, January 24, 2008

Which lefties did he compromise with?? When did they meet?

Which committee did Bush negotiate with?

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 2:55 PM, January 24, 2008

Pelosi and Reid. Yesterday and today. He didn't have to negotiate with any committees. They run the show. Any other questions?

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 3:48 PM, January 24, 2008

You don't know what you're talking about.

You don't even understand how legislation is made.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 3:51 PM, January 24, 2008

I love it when JW gets his feelings hurt and he takes all of his posts down.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 3:52 PM, January 24, 2008

And when did I do that, little fella?

That's what I thought.

Dismissed.

# Posted by:

JWCoop10 | 4:09 PM, January 24, 2008

bubba said...

"Bush had proposed a higher rebate for those that PAID taxes but had to compromise with the lefties and agree to ALSO pay $300 to the wards of the state. Oh well, what else is new."

Well, someone has gotta look out for you and the little fella, bubble boy. We don't want ya hurting yourselves or those of us in the fact-based, educated and productive wing of mainstream society.

You ain't heavy, you're our knuckle-draggin' nitwit brothers.

# Posted by:

JWCoop10 | 4:20 PM, January 24, 2008

It was a compromise against raising food stamps and unemployment benefits. If you made over $3k and payed social security tax, you get a check. Its a smaller check than those who actually payed income tax, but it's still a check.

Even more BS is the cut off of those making $75k single and $150 married. $75k ain't much depending on where you live.

These people could "stimulate" the economy just as easily as anybody else.

Plus its a double whammy for these folks, since the over $75k earners will be paying this back later.

What a 'in joke.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 4:31 PM, January 24, 2008

I wonder if that's taxable or gross.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 4:34 PM, January 24, 2008

How do you get a rebate when you don't even pay into the system?

rebate=free lunch in washington speak

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 4:35 PM, January 24, 2008

oh, JW is back. must be they give the halfwits at the halfway house free time before forced medication time.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 4:37 PM, January 24, 2008

"To address the mortgage crisis, the package raises the limit on Federal Housing Administration loans from $362,000 to as high as $729,750 in expensive areas, allowing more subprime mortgage holders to refinance into federally insured loans."

Are you kidding me? Isn't this what got us in this problem?

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 4:41 PM, January 24, 2008

And Bush kept insisting Congress make his tax cuts for the wealthiest 1 percent of Americans permanent. Thank God that crap got thrown out. Sorry Gov. Douglas. Looks like you didn't get that wish, seeing as you earn $150,000.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 4:48 PM, January 24, 2008

Anonymous said...

"oh, JW is back. must be they give the halfwits at the halfway house free time before forced medication time."

Gee, a nameless nitwit with nothin' to say and bupkis to back it up with for a claim he made 10 days before T-Day. What are the odds.

Always a pleasure.

# Posted by:

JWCoop10 | 4:59 PM, January 24, 2008

"And Bush kept insisting Congress make his tax cuts for the wealthiest 1 percent of Americans permanent. Thank God that crap got thrown out. Sorry Gov. Douglas. Looks like you didn't get that wish, seeing as you earn $150,000."

You sound more than a little jealous that you have not earned your way into the top 1%.... With some hard work, a little ingenuity and risk taking, you too can make the club. It's the American way.

But fear not. Bernie S and all the Progs are diligently working in the background to figure out how to take the money from them and give it to you.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 5:04 PM, January 24, 2008

Anonymous said...
"To address the mortgage crisis, the package raises the limit on Federal Housing Administration loans from $362,000 to as high as $729,750 in expensive areas, allowing more subprime mortgage holders to refinance into federally insured loans."

"Are you kidding me? Isn't this what got us in this problem?"

Hey, remember who you're talkin' about here. It's Bush. It's the Party that gave us Teapot Dome, the Depression, Watergate, The Deficit, Iran Contra, a Bigger Deficit, Endless Investigations of Irrelevant Blow Jobs But Nothing For Blown Surpluses, New, Bigger Deficits, Unending, Unnecessary Wars based on Cooked Intel or an Economy That Sucks.

The Party doesn't care about the Country and Bush doesn't give a damn about them or the Country.

Kanye West was wrong. It's not that Bush doesn't care about Black People. Bush doesn't give a damn about anybody but Bush.

# Posted by:

JWCoop10 | 5:16 PM, January 24, 2008

It must be feeding time - the handlers have taken the Hannibal Lector mask off jw.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 5:16 PM, January 24, 2008

JW said..."The Party doesn't care about the Country and Bush doesn't give a damn about them or the Country."

Didn't Obama just recently make the statement that the Republican party has been the Party of Ideas and Ingenuity.

He is a Dem so he must be right.

JW, please check with Barack and have him review his proof with you.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 5:25 PM, January 24, 2008

Not to detract from this rousing banter but I find it curious all the headline news on the minute to minute tracking of Heath Ledger's death. He was a fine actor and it is a tradegy that he has passed. Curiously, at the same time, there is little recognition in the media of the sacrifices made by our military in Iraq and Afganistan.

You don't have to like the war or Bush or anybody else but they have done what has been asked of them with pride and honor with their losses being reduced to mere numbers with no focus on their lives and accomplishments. Our priorities are lost.

My two cents.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 5:58 PM, January 24, 2008

Great point -- and breath of very fresh air.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 6:35 PM, January 24, 2008

Dude, it's HEATH LEDGER. Come on.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 6:55 PM, January 24, 2008

Anonymous said...

JW said..."The Party doesn't care about the Country and Bush doesn't give a damn about them or the Country."

"Didn't Obama just recently make the statement that the Republican party has been the Party of Ideas and Ingenuity."

Gee, now who could have guessed that you'd folk this up, too, little, little ignorant, ill-informed, fundamentally-dishonest, lyin' sack o'gop-slop fella.

While I understand you immediately throwing in the towel and not even contesting the Bush/Gop not givin' a damn about the Country thing, in the hopes that nobody'd notice, little fella, Obama said the gops had run a better product launch and marketing campaign. He didn't say they made a better product.

In fact, he said they were the party of Bad Ideas.

Obama said Reagan had been successful in getting some traditional Democrats to vote against their own economic interests and buy into his deficits don't matter drivel. He did.

How'd Reagan shippin' their jobs overseas and stiffin' them on their wages, benefits and pension plans work out for their Union Households, little fella?

That's what I thought.

If you can produce evidence that Obama has embraced Reagan's policies feel free to produce it and dazzle me, little lyin'-ass nitwit fella.

Given your track record on producing evidence to substantiate your invariably bogus allegations, you'll understand if I don't wait up.

"He is a Dem so he must be right."

Nice try. He's a Dem, so if you're quoting him, you're either misquoting him, lying or both.

I never go wrong bettin' on door number three with you, little nameless nitwit.

Always a profitable pleasure.

# Posted by:

JWCoop10 | 7:13 PM, January 24, 2008

m. pitts said...

"Great point -- and breath of very fresh air."

Nice try, rodney king. Too bad it's irrelevant to the topic at hand on all counts, little fella.

Heath Ledger didn't fall asleep at the switch and allow 9/11, Bush did.

Heath Ledger didn't invade the wrong Country, screw up Afghanistan, get Pat Tillman killed and then turn around and lie about his death to his Family and the World for political purposes, Bush did.

Heath Ledger didn't force US Troops to suffer under the incompetence of Rummy the Dummy, Bush did.

Nitwits like you pretending that our troops have sacrificed, are sacrificing and will continue to sacrifice for anything remotely necessary or worthwhile were, are and will continue to be responsible for their deaths and loss of limbs.

Their blood is on your hands while you show your appreciation for their sacrifice by giving a pass to the scum responsible for sticking them in Building 18 while you fail to hold the slime that put them there accountable, so spare me your counterfeit concern for their well-being and the stories the media cover with your pathetic attempts to change the subject cause ya got nothin' to say.

Dismissed.

# Posted by:

JWCoop10 | 7:41 PM, January 24, 2008

bubba said...

"It must be feeding time - the handlers have taken the Hannibal Lector mask off jw."

In other words, bubble boy's got bupkis.

Dismissed.

# Posted by:

JWCoop10 | 7:44 PM, January 24, 2008

Anonymous has left a new comment on the post "Two takes":

"How do you get a rebate when you don't even pay into the system?"

Please feel free to substantiate your claim that people who don't pay into they system will get rebates, little clueless cretin fella.

Knock yourself out.

# Posted by:

JWCoop10 | 7:49 PM, January 24, 2008

That's OK JW's not a real Vermonter anyways so just dismiss everything he says!

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 9:10 PM, January 24, 2008

Anonymous said...

"That's OK JW's not a real Vermonter anyways so just dismiss everything he says!"

In other words, you're an ignorant, ill-informed, knuckle-draggin' nitwit with no answer, no case and no clue.

I never doubted ya for a second, little nameless nitwit.

# Posted by:

JWCoop10 | 10:02 PM, January 24, 2008

JW's all excited. Must be the nurses gave out extra candy bars in the group home tonight.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 10:48 PM, January 24, 2008

JW's a great example of why abortion should be legal.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 10:50 PM, January 24, 2008

Today's highlights:

Gee, now who could have guessed that you'd folk this up, too, little, little ignorant, ill-informed, fundamentally-dishonest, lyin' sack o'gop-slop fella.
dazzle me, little lyin'-ass nitwit fella.
you're either misquoting him, lying or both.
little nameless nitwit.
Nitwits like you
ya got nothin' to say.
little clueless cretin fella.
you're an ignorant, ill-informed, knuckle-draggin' nitwit with no answer, no case and no clue.
little nameless nitwit.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 12:35 AM, January 25, 2008

JW is just an eloguent guy... he presents such a positive view of Vermont. It make us all proud.

What's most interesting is you would expect a liberal, intellectual thinker (like JW) would be the most tolerant and open minded person on the board. Instead he is the most intolerant, juvenile and dictatorial.

HMMM...what does that tell you?

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 7:04 AM, January 25, 2008

I think the 12:35AM poster is on to someting.

Would you mind just reposting the list of JW's standard insults every morning just to get it out of the way and to save JW all the effort of repeating and repeating and repeating the same old trite remarks.

Clearly the Coopster is challenged from a creativity perspective and finds comfort and solace in cutting and pasting the same stock responses to every post (and on his more medicated days, even attacking his own posts).

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 7:16 AM, January 25, 2008

What a bunch of nitwits.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 8:57 AM, January 25, 2008

Yes, jw sure is an argument for legalized abortion - retroactively.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 11:14 AM, January 25, 2008

And Bubba is a perfect example of why people should always use condoms.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 11:17 AM, January 25, 2008

JW's kids are in state custody.

JW has no idea how they behave.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 1:55 PM, January 25, 2008

Why not leave people's children out of your expressions of animosity?

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 2:32 PM, January 25, 2008

Anonymous said...

"HMMM...what does that tell you?"

That you've got nothing to say and nothing to talk about but me, little anonymous fella.

Do go on.

# Posted by:

JWCoop10 | 4:30 PM, January 25, 2008

But really......... what is Anthony Pollina going to do with
Peter Galbreith? Is he going to drop out now?

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 8:53 PM, January 25, 2008

Or asking JW to back up his hotshot mouth with some facts instead of running his yam about squat.

Ya got Bupkis.
Ya got Bupkis.
Ya got Bupkis.
Ya got Bupkis.
Ya got Bupkis.
Ya got Bupkis.
Ya got Bupkis.
Ya got Bupkis.
Ya got Bupkis.
Ya got Bupkis.
Ya got Bupkis.
Ya got Bupkis.
Ya got Bupkis.
Ya got Bupkis.
Ya got Bupkis.
Ya got Bupkis.
Ya got Bupkis.
Ya got Bupkis.
Ya got Bupkis.
Ya got Bupkis.
Ya got Bupkis.
Ya got Bupkis.
Ya got Bupkis.
Ya got Bupkis.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 4:43 PM, January 26, 2008

JW should just go home if he hates Vermonters so much!!

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 4:43 PM, January 26, 2008

Anonymous said...

"Or asking JW to back up his hotshot mouth with some facts instead of running his yam about squat."

"JW should just go home if he hates Vermonters so much!!"

I am home, little nameless spineless witless fella.

You ain't a Vermonter. You're just ignorant, ill-informed, bigoted take back Vermont trash.

Big difference.

You can anonymously huff and puff gop-slop nonsense all ya want. The fact is, little nameless spineless witless fella, you got Bupkis on all counts.

Dismissed.

# Posted by:

JWCoop10 | 4:57 PM, January 26, 2008

Galbraith is probably a decent fellow who agreed to take one for the team this election cycle.

The fact is Douglas' message -- that we're doing alright in Vermont, but we could do better -- resonates with a lot of people.

Remember Scudder Parker's pitch? It basically came down to, "You're not doing as well as you think you are," a la Doug Hoffer. He got waxed on that.

The Democrats' current message -- that Vermont is really a great place to do business but Douglas keeps badmouthing the state -- won't have any better traction. People know instinctively whether they're better off now than they were before, and whether they trust the current governor on issues relating to jobs and the economy.

"Galbraith blamed the Republicans, Douglas included, for the current state of economic affairs, noting the plunging stock markets."

Yeah, like Douglas sets national policy or Vermont can influence Wall Street or world markets. Linking Douglas to Bush was tried by Clavelle, and that didn't work too well either.

Galbraith is going to have to do a lot better than that.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 7:14 PM, January 26, 2008

"Galbraith blamed the Republicans, Douglas included, for the current state of economic affairs, noting the plunging stock markets."

Well, given the facts, little fella, it's kinda like blamin' Hitler for the Holocaust while you're tellin' us he had nothing to do with it and the whole thing is just a big misunderstanding.

That slop sold in '42 and 44. It didn't fly in '46.

"Yeah, like Douglas sets national policy or Vermont can influence Wall Street or world markets. Linking Douglas to Bush was tried by Clavelle, and that didn't work too well either."

Sure thing, shmendrik. That must be why Doogie did DC Thursday to testify against Shrub's EPA slime, little doesn't know what day it is fella."

JW, I still don't see what Douglas testifying against Bush's EPA has to do with Galbraith's feeble attempt to link Douglas to the "curent state of economic affairs" and "plunging stock markets," which was my point. I never said that Republicans and/or Bush were blameless for the economy or stock market, so your attempt to portray me as some sort of Holocaust denier is uncalled for.

I just don't see how Galbraith is going to do any better than Parker or Clavelle if his plan is to rehash their messages and hope the economy at both the national and state level tanks enough.

Vermonters may dislike Bush a lot, but I don't think they're going to blame Douglas for what Bush does.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 10:55 AM, January 27, 2008

jw has graduated to a higher level of idiocy when he blames Bush for Vermont's problems. What does Bush have to do with VPIRG, ACTs 250, 60, 68, etc., CLF, Symington, Shumlin, the whole tax and permitting situations, a totally left-wing House and Senate, perverts from everywhere flocking to Vermont, bleeding heart judges, lack of infrastructures due to constantly raiding the highway fund, and on and on (I guess jw thinks he causes ice storms as well). Is Bush also responsible for the far better situation in Georgia, New Hampshire, New Mexico, North Carolina, just to mention a few of the 49 states better off than Vermont? What a moron!

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 3:18 PM, January 27, 2008

bubba said...

"jw has graduated to a higher level of idiocy when he blames Bush for Vermont's problems."

Ya mean besides failing to fund NCLB and make good on all other Federal Funding, bubble boy?

"What does Bush have to do with VPIRG, ACTs 250, 60, 68, etc., CLF, Symington, Shumlin, the whole tax and permitting situations, a totally left-wing House and Senate, perverts from everywhere flocking to Vermont, bleeding heart judges, lack of infrastructures due to constantly raiding the highway fund, and on and on (I guess jw thinks he causes ice storms as well).

And your evidence that those things are responsible for the current economic downturn, bubble boy, is.............?

That's what I thought.

As for the ice storm, shrub wasn't in Office when the Ice Storm occurred 10 years ago, little fella. We had a competent, legitimate President who had the economy moving in the right direction and didn't go around starting wars based on bogus intelligence. Times were good despite a criminally incompetent gop-controlled Congress. If shrub had been in office, Isle La Motte would still be without power.

"Is Bush also responsible for the far better situation in Georgia, New Hampshire, New Mexico, North Carolina, just to mention a few of the 49 states better off than Vermont? What a moron!"

And your evidence that the other 49States are thriving because of Bush's policies is........?

That's what I thought.

Michigan will be glad to hear that their economy is doing well, bubble boy. They've been laboring under the impression that they weren't doing so well for the past decade or three. You should give 'em a call and set 'em straight, bubble boy.

Once again, bubble boy, you've managed to prove that in addition to proving beyond a shadow of a doubt that no one knows less than you about politics, government, the environment or anything else likely to come up here, you're just plain ignorant red state slime who Vermont would be better off without, so feel free to hit the road with the little fella for more ignorant, bigoted parts unknown.

It's been fun.

# Posted by:

JWCoop10 | 3:46 PM, January 27, 2008

JW COOP said: "However, that doesn't change the fact that you made that post as anonymous, I'm dubious as to your point or why I should give a damn."

You're anonymous too. So am I. And so is anybody who doesn't post under their given name. What difference does it make? And why should any of us give a hoot, for that matter?

You're correct, I erroneously thought you were handicapping Douglas as 50/50 against Galbraith. My mistake.

But I still don't think that the fact that Douglas chairs Bush's state committee is going to be effective as a campaign issue, no matter who uses it. Sure, some things have changed, e.g. Bush is even more unpopular than he was, but I don't think Vermonters are going to blame Douglas for what Bush has done.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 4:00 PM, January 27, 2008

IndependentVter said...

"JW COOP said: "However, that doesn't change the fact that you made that post as anonymous, I'm dubious as to your point or why I should give a damn."

"You're anonymous too. So am I. And so is anybody who doesn't post under their given name. What difference does it make? And why should any of us give a hoot, for that matter?"

The difference you yourself have finally hit upon. One knows whom one is addressing and you can't claim some other IndependentVtr said something any more than I can claim some other jwcoop10 said something. People are accountable for what they claim and what they say.

Anonymous posters tend to post as anonymous posters for a reason. For the most part, they don't know what the hell they're talking about and require the cover of anonymity. Only bubbles revels in his ignorance.

"You're correct, I erroneously thought you were handicapping Douglas as 50/50 against Galbraith. My mistake."

"But I still don't think that the fact that Douglas chairs Bush's state committee is going to be effective as a campaign issue, no matter who uses it."

You still don't appear to grasp the fact that I didn't say they would. I'm merely saying that coupled with those facts and current conditions, in a Presidential Election Year in a State that abhors gops, Vermont may decide that they've seen enough of his act. He's certainly not going to benefit from anyone's coattails.

"Sure, some things have changed, e.g. Bush is even more unpopular than he was, but I don't think Vermonters are going to blame Douglas for what Bush has done."

Things have changed for the worse in large part because of Bush's boneheaded policies. Those policies affect Vermont as they do all other states. With few exceptions, Douglas has supported those policies. Even the ones he hasn't supported have not prompted him to speak out against them.

He may have dodged his last bullet.

# Posted by:

JWCoop10 | 4:49 PM, January 27, 2008

Ah, you've outdone yourself now.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 6:16 AM, January 28, 2008

jw was right about one thing - Michigan is now about as bad off as Vermont - and is probably as liberal as well. Boy, those unions and democrats sure have done a lot of good! And oh yeah, I do remember how great it was under Slick Willie, particularly when the NASDAC bubble burst in 2000 causing people to lose, in many cases, their retirement investments, and creating the Clinton recession Bush had to start with!

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 6:54 AM, January 28, 2008

Gee, I also seem to remember how the Billary team was going to give us all free health care. It seemed like a given, what with Bill as president plus a dimocrat run House and Senate. But even with total control of EVERYTHING the idiots managed to screw everything up! (Sort of like little Howie kicking all of the health insurers out of Vermont) Yep, things sure were good back then!

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 1:01 PM, January 28, 2008

bubba said...

"Gee, I also seem to remember how the Billary team was going to give us all free health care..."

Bubble Boy, you're money in the bank. If you remember it, it never happened.

Dismissed.

# Posted by:

JWCoop10 | 3:25 PM, January 28, 2008

I heard Pollina speak on Sunday and he said he can beat both of the candidates so I think he is in it for the long haul.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 3:43 PM, January 28, 2008

Whoa! Pollina actually spoke? In public? Now that he's overcome that obstacle, maybe now he'll start campaigning?

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 4:49 PM, January 28, 2008

This comment has been removed by the author.

# Posted by:

JWCoop10 | 5:45 PM, January 28, 2008

jw - were you in a druggie haze in 1993 during the Clinton health-care fiasco?

Thought so.
Amazing, the selective memory of idiot savants.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 6:57 PM, January 28, 2008

Nice try, bubbles. You don't think at all.

Dismissed.

# Posted by:

JWCoop10 | 8:57 PM, January 28, 2008

Nice try, bubbles. You don't think at all.

Dismissed.

# Posted by:

JWCoop10 | 8:57 PM, January 28, 2008

JW trying to attack a fact with an insult. Nice try but we see through you, you empty-suit.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 4:52 PM, February 03, 2008

Anonymous said...

"JW trying to attack a fact with an insult. Nice try but we see through you, you empty-suit."

What fact is that, little fella?

I knew ya had bupkis, little fraudulent fella, but apparently, I've underestimated the depths of your cluelessness and despair.

You're trolling for 6 day old posts claimin' bubble boy spewed a fact when neither one of you could survive an encounter with one.

You poor dumb schmuck.

Get yourself spayed or neutered, little fella. Better still, go find yourself a tar pit and fall in it.

There's just not enough oxygen left to waste on the likes o'you, little fella.

Dismissed.

# Posted by:

JWCoop10 | 8:49 PM, February 03, 2008

Any new phrases JW. It must be painful cutting and pasting the stand list of insults. I know it takes some thought but if you try hard even you may be able to (think).

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 7:12 AM, February 04, 2008

What, no strange but telling reference to Brokeback Mountain this time, little confused fella?

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 7:31 AM, February 04, 2008

Just keeping you honest JW. I know you think your factless statements will just fade away but I am watching you, you empty suit.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 8:01 AM, February 04, 2008

Anonymous said...

"Any new phrases JW. It must be painful cutting and pasting the stand list of insults. I know it takes some thought but if you try hard even you may be able to (think)."

Any new lies, little nameless, factually-challenged fella?

That's what I thought.

Always a pleasure.

# Posted by:

JWCoop10 | 8:27 AM, February 04, 2008

Anonymous said...

"What, no strange but telling reference to Brokeback Mountain this time, little confused fella?"

Feel free to list 'em, little nameless-nitwit, factually-challenged, fraudulent fella.

That's what I thought.

Nice try, little fella. I leave that stuff to you.

Clearly, ya got nothin' else.

Always a pleasure.

# Posted by:

JWCoop10 | 8:32 AM, February 04, 2008

"Just keeping you honest JW. I know you think your factless statements will just fade away but I am watching you, you empty suit."

Good for you, little fella. I wasn't aware it was Bring a nameless, factually-challenged, nitwit to work day, little fella, but I'm happy to let ya tag along.

Always a pleasure.

# Posted by:

JWCoop10 | 8:52 AM, February 04, 2008

You don't have a job. Nice try, little fella.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 12:58 PM, February 04, 2008

Anonymous has left a new comment on the post "Two takes":

"You don't have a job. Nice try, little fella."

I don't, eh? Feel free to cough up your evidence proving that, little fella.

Thank God you have the free time to always be here to tell me that, little fella.

It's a sure sign ya got bupkis.

Always a pleasure.

# Posted by:

JWCoop10 | 2:07 PM, February 04, 2008