What's next for John Carlson? He's down again. After sticking his political and professional neck far out once more, he got it chopped off.
He's the drive-time talk-host (KVI m-f, 3-6p) who, with fellow KVI talker Kirby Wilbur, thought up and gurued I-912, the anti-gas tax initiative which tried to jam a stick in the spokes of the massive transportation package passed by the Legislature in March.
The measure went down to defeat in Tuesday's election but not until it had followed an amazing arc that started with the talkers and their listeners gathering the signatures and getting the proposition on the ballot in a miraculous 32 days.
Carlson called it the "Cinderella Initiative."
Those were heady days--everyone agreed: I-912 would pass overwhelmingly. In summer, it polled in the 70th percentiles; but that was until its meteoric trajectory hit the rough atmospherics of November.
Carlson finds himself down once more. Not only did I-912, lose, but Carlson's standing with many Party stalwarts was badly damaged. Of course the GOP endorsed I-912--the whores that they are--because they thought it would win. But opposition to it was bitter in some hidden quarters--the business, donor quarters.
If 912 had won, it would have helped, but after Carlson and Brett Bader staked so much and then lost the thing, there will be atonement.
Carlson's ratings were down in the last two ratings periods and it's rumored that Fisher brass are not happy with having to pay to defend themselves from the legal issues brought up by Carlson, Wilbur and I-912. It is said that Carlson's contract is coming up in December and that he's been looking around. Rumors are that, so has Fisher.
His has been a career that has had some amazing highs and some dizzying defeats. Win or lose, Carlson's ups and downs have always been center stage in local media.
He always runs against political insiderism, but he’s an insider’s insider and has been a politician all his adult life.
In 1986, southpaw political professional and historian Walt Crowley (founding director of HistoryLink.org) wanted to do a liberal/conservative point counter point on TV. He went looking on the UW campus for Carlson who had been stirring up some headlines as one of a politically precocious, conservative “bratpack" that stirred up UW student life in the late '70's and '80's. Others in this group of brazen student reactionaries were Brett Bader, now Attorney General Rob McKenna and Kirby Wilbur.
Carlson agreed to it despite Crowley being a well-known 1960's leader of student protest and a radical/liberal of the era. The two worked together honing their debate styles and talked Lloyd J. Cooney, the hemorrhoidal conservative CEO of KIRO TV into giving them a half hour spot after the Sunday evening news and before 60 Minutes.
In one of local TV news' last gasps of relevance, the show was a Sunday mainstay for seven years. Crowley says he and his wife Marie McCaffrey became close friends with Carlson, helping him grow up and in the process exposed the naive, straight-laced college conservative to some of life he may not have run into at Young Republican ice cream socials. "I remember sitting with John after a TV show having a beer at the Comet Tavern and pointing out to him that the woman sitting next to him at the bar was a transvestite. That made quite an impression on him."
In 1984, Carlson had run for the Legislature in Seattle’s 34th House District. He knocked on the doors of 10,000 homes in West Seattle, the neighborhood where he grew up. He received 19,829 votes -- 49.2 percent of the vote but lost to the incumbent Georgette Valle. He was 25.
"Losing that race was probably the best thing that happened to me,'' he says. "The next year I co-founded the Washington Institute and started my media career.
In 1985, Bader and Carlson started the Washington Institute Foundation, a free-market, conservative policy think tank in Bellevue.
His next rejection was by The Seattle Times who dropped his Tuesday column because he kept scooping his own work (and therefore the Times) on his radio show.
He and his Washington Institute pushed the "Three Strikes You're Out'' measure, which in 1993 began putting three-time violent criminals in prison for life; and "Hard Time For Armed Crime'' in 1996, which expanded sentences for felons caught with weapons.
In 1996, when he wouldn’t quit using his show to promote the anti-affirmative action I-200, (for which he was paid director). Fisher Broadcasting, the futzy old flour mill who owns KVI, fired him. They’d got nervous when 2,500 mostly black high schoolers marched around the station with signs that said "KKK: KVI, Karlson, KOMO."
Carlson says: "The station initially permitted me to campaign for it on the air... and even let me announce that I was heading it on the air. Then the parent company took a position against it, donated $30,000 to oppose it, and the directive changed. This, during a time when the station promos insisted that the hosts views (are not restricted in any way). I rebelled and got canned, then eventually brought back."
Carlson’s troubles were blamed by radio fans on the “liberal media” (laughable if you think about Fisher Broadcasting) but the 59% passage of I-200 won him national renown, tremendous cache in the state GOP and eventual reinstatement at KVI.
Being able to come back is very important for a politician.
His triumph gave him delusions of grandeur and the Carlson amazingly ran for and won the GOP nomination for governor in 2000 to run against the popular Gary Locke. It was mostly a quixotic run by a radio broadcaster who'd never administered anything more than his own checkbook; and whose name had recognition with far too few citizens statewide.
As a gubernatorial candidate, he ran against Seattle, or the “Space Needle sphere of influence,” just as he does now. Bader ran that campaign and it didn't work--Carlson lost ignominiously, polling only 40% of the vote--winning fewer votes than Ellen Craswell, the harsh old evangelical, flat-earther who won the GOP nomination in 1996.
Carlson and Wilbur did well both politically and with ratings during the post election attempt to unseat Governor Gregoire. They tried to extend and project the rage worked up by that nastiness into the gas tax revolt. The audience apparently grew weary after nearly 2 years of solid partisan politics (remember how early the 2004 cycle started)--the energy for the issues and the drop in ratings were nearly simultaneous.
This is a set-back, but John Carlson will spring back. We can't tell you how or when, but when it happens, there will definitely be a press avail.
Medved sure is pressuring Entercom to get Carlson at KTTH.
Posted by: sclub | November 10, 2005 at 10:05 AM
I'll try to call in today and let him know what a fucking loser he is.
Fuck you Carlson.
Posted by: John | November 10, 2005 at 10:43 AM
Gee John, you sure are tolerant now. Now just what was that pesky 1st amendment agian, oh well that only applies to your opinion
Posted by: Recife | November 10, 2005 at 10:50 AM
Yes, and I'm sure John would sanctimoniously mouth those famous words "I may disagree with you, but I'll defend to the death your right to say it."
Unless, of course, you actually do disagree with him. At which point he'd probably say "F*** you!"
Posted by: ExDem | November 10, 2005 at 11:32 AM
Maybe he could get a real job.
Posted by: David | November 10, 2005 at 12:00 PM
he has as much right to cuss Carlson out as carlson does to deliver the crap he does every day. As far as I know, its pretty hard for one private citizen to stifle another citizen's 1st amendment rights... Well, at least without killing them
Posted by: windie | November 10, 2005 at 02:34 PM
John sez, "I'll try to call in today and let him know what a fucking loser he is.
Fuck you Carlson."
Another loonie with a firm grasp of the debate.
Posted by: Lump | November 10, 2005 at 02:41 PM
Lump - I think you're the unreasonable one. Why don't you go F*** yourself until you grow up enough to participate in this enlightened forum.
Posted by: ExDem | November 10, 2005 at 02:59 PM
ExDem sez, "Lump - I think you're the unreasonable one. Why don't you go F*** yourself until you grow up enough to participate in this enlightened forum."
Really? Nice to see you've stooped down to their level.
Posted by: Lump | November 10, 2005 at 04:19 PM
Oh boy, a Godzilla and Rodan movie
Posted by: chris | November 10, 2005 at 05:19 PM
Lump - I was just trying to be progressive and enlightened. It looks like I passed the test. Now I'll go back to being myself again.
Posted by: ExDem | November 10, 2005 at 05:45 PM
ExDem, you showed your true self, saying fuck-you to Lump...I don't blame you, I'm tempted to say it to him all the time. but I always have my liberal good manners to fall back on...While you're at it, would you say fuck you to Scrilla while you're at it?
I love seeing you two go at it, seems you conservatives are at each other's throat a lot these days.
Thanks for knowing "enlightenment" when you see it.
Posted by: blathering michael | November 10, 2005 at 06:48 PM
ExDem sez,"Lump - I was just trying to be progressive and enlightened. It looks like I passed the test. Now I'll go back to being myself again."
Ah ha!! just needed it splained to me.
The Blatherer sez," seems you conservatives are at each other's throat a lot these days."
Isn't it nice to know that conservatives can have a difference of opinion instead of walking around with ones nose up the bum of the person in front of them all the time as the opponents do?
Posted by: Lump | November 10, 2005 at 07:06 PM
o god if that were only true Lumpy, lad...
Posted by: blathering michael | November 10, 2005 at 08:01 PM
Lump sez, "Isn't it nice to know that conservatives can have a difference of opinion instead of walking around with ones nose up the bum of the person in front of them all the time as the opponents do?."
The Blatherer sez, "o god if that were only true Lumpy, lad..."
Gosh, Michael. I'm racking my brain in overtime trying to remember a front page headline in the NYT or The Post that had an article about the Dems breaking ranks over anything. Help me out. Ole Harry Reid stands at the mike and there are all his cohorts bent over with their cheeks showing in unison. And how does a lefty keep a straight face when Ted Kennedy says anything?
Posted by: Lump | November 11, 2005 at 04:02 PM
"I'm racking my brain in overtime trying to remember a front page headline in the NYT or The Post that had an article about the Dems breaking ranks over anything. Help me out."
Ummm...how about the John Roberts nomination? That shameful bankruptcy bill? How about that f*cking WAR VOTE?! Hello?!
The Dems are famous for being the largest herd of cats in the world when it comes to party unity.
Don't you right-wingers ever read a newspaper or....oh right.
Posted by: Trip | November 11, 2005 at 04:15 PM
BTW, do you right-wingers keep a straight face whenever, say, Pat Robertson says anything?
Posted by: Trip | November 11, 2005 at 04:17 PM
Can't imagine how the republicans yesterday couldn't agree on torture rules or how to cut funding for the poor. In a parlament, that would be a vote of no-confidence and a new election would be held.
Posted by: chris | November 11, 2005 at 04:26 PM
I'm sorry, I think I missed something in America. What offices has Pat Robertson been elected to? Last I knew, he was some televangelist.
Posted by: ExDem | November 11, 2005 at 05:22 PM
Don't worry, people try to link Jane Fonda to everything that is left, so I'll just wait for San Francisco to be overrun by alQuesedia while O'Really holds his breath...
Posted by: chris | November 11, 2005 at 05:49 PM
Ol' Pat doesn't seem to know he is "just" a teletubbie..er ..televangelist...nor does Dobson.
As long as the Republican Party continues to vett everything through the fundegelicals, they are all part of the same soup.
Posted by: sparky | November 11, 2005 at 06:00 PM
"I'm sorry, I think I missed something in America. What offices has Pat Robertson been elected to? Last I knew, he was some televangelist. "
Pat Robertson and his loyal army of wackos happens to own George W. Bush.
If you don't believe that, just ask Harriet Miers whatever happened to her up-or-down vote.
So you have to figure that when he warns a small Pennsylvania town that God has abandoned them for rejecting Intelligent Design (and didn't THAT just give the whole I.D. sham away?), he might speak for a majority of Republicans as well?
Posted by: Trip | November 12, 2005 at 12:04 AM
I think Pat Robertson speaks for himself and his followers. And yes, he supports Republican causes. Every political party has it's sub-groups, so what? If Pat Robertson says something silly supposedly "in the name of God", I don't see the President or the Chair of the Republican Party adding their support to his comments in the press or at public events. Just like I don't see Hillary Clinton or John Kerry publicly admonishing wacko groups on the left like the MoveOn.org crowd or Jesse Jackson's following.
Politicians stay strangely silent when sizable voting blocks act like a crazy old uncle - a member of the family that makes you cringe sometimes but is still a member of your family. All that being said, if Pat Roberston believes that the people of Dover, PA have turned away from God, so what? Why do any of you care anyway? Aren't you "tolerant" of other people's religious beliefs? I think he's kind of a nut, but what he said doesn't affect me. Why are some of you so energized about it? I don't see any of you getting energized when some wierd leftist claims that the government intentionally blew up the levees in New Orleans to kill black people or when Cindy Sheehan talks about government relief troops as "occupiers" in New Orleans.
As an aside to Blathering Michael - I never actually use the "F" word. I think cursing is a foul habit.
Posted by: ExDem | November 12, 2005 at 08:23 AM
so, how did Moveon become wacko?
Posted by: chris | November 12, 2005 at 09:20 AM
" I don't see any of you getting energized when some wierd leftist claims that the government intentionally blew up the levees in New Orleans to kill black people or when Cindy Sheehan talks about government relief troops as "occupiers" in New Orleans."
Please provide the source for these claims.
At any rate, none of these phantom people have any real power to speak of, unlike the folks in the White House, who believed in the conspiracy theory that Saddam was actually a threat to the U.S., and that intelligence actually existed to prove them right.
Now we have over 2,000 good Americans dead for what you now know to be one of the biggest lies and cover-ups in our history.
I think that little fact trumps whatever someone who gets their news from the fillings in their teeth thinks about anything.
Posted by: Trip | November 12, 2005 at 10:32 AM
Trip sez, "Please provide the source for these claims."
Holy Crap! Don't you ever read a newspaper? Do you ever watch a newscast?
Posted by: Lump | November 12, 2005 at 12:28 PM
People can worship a turnip if they want to--fine with me. When they demand that I worship said turnip, or that the way I worship the turnip is not good enough, they miss the point of religion anyway.
Posted by: sparky | November 12, 2005 at 02:29 PM
"Holy Crap! Don't you ever read a newspaper? Do you ever watch a newscast?"
HOLY CRAP! How can I NOT these days? They're chock FULL of wonderful news for America these days!
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/10013594/site/newsweek/
http://washingtontimes.com/metro/20051110-124747-9193r.htm
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/11/11/AR2005111101832.html
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=10000087&sid=aO8qi7hNIyk0&refer=top_world_news
http://www.forbes.com/work/feeds/afx/2005/11/09/afx2328524.html
Well...you get the idea.
Posted by: Trip | November 12, 2005 at 03:57 PM
Conservatives call any organization or persons who are effective politically, "extreme," or wacko.
That goes for MoveOn.org a grassroots organization that grew up from nothing at the time of the impeachment of Bill Clinton to an effective fundraising, campaigning and opinion-maker/breaker on the political scene, particularly in the 2004 election. Moveon is no more radical than any of the 49% of the American voters who voted for Democrats, they're just very good at presenting our case and they raised the grassroots dough to be effective doing it..
Al Franken, is a popular comedian and well-known entertainer who is a needle under the nails of the Republicans and could get elected as the junior Senator from Minnesota.
Michael Moore whose Fahrenheit 911 made a real difference in politicicizing young people and galvanizing the base in the 2004 election. No one was ever able to debunk any substantial charge he made against Bush. (some of his movies have contained factual errors, but not F-911). His popular movies are the liberals' answer to the polemicizing done by another popular medium--talk radio.
George Soros...OUR billionaire, who gives money to OUR causes is terrifying, and demonized daily though THEIR billionaires like Richard Mellon Scaifes, and many more, are just good citizens--again, smeared because he's a threat.
Posted by: blathering michael | November 12, 2005 at 04:44 PM
ExDem: what’s the difference between using the coy phrase "F-word," or bleeping out words when everyone knows exactly what word is being deleted? You’re in fact, using those words and everybody knows it. For some reason, writing F*** is different and more righteous than writing FUCK.
People give those words their power, we children of the Victorians and the Puritans love the forbidden, with the titillation of the tease--the ****'s, the “blankety blanks”, the bleeps. It's childish...if history is any guide, after a while, the present day naughties--the fucks, the niggers, the shits, will be commonplace and a new bunch will be in place...unless we transcend our prurient interest in prurient interests and grow the fuck up.
As a writer, the only reason I hate seeing those words become too commonplace, is because it dulls them as tools in my writer’s tool box. I don’t use the words often, but when I do, as I did in the last graf, I do it to give a sentence some force.
Obviously I don’t do that in every context in which I write, but the art of cursing is knowing when and where to do it…that was always the lesson I taught my kids…it’s not the words that are bad—they're just words after all--it’s your choice of who and when.
Posted by: blathering michael | November 12, 2005 at 04:50 PM
The Blatherer sez, "George Soros...OUR billionaire, who gives money to OUR causes is terrifying, and demonized daily though THEIR billionaires like Richard Mellon Scaifes, and many more, are just good citizens--again, smeared because he's a threat."
I thought only the Republicans were rich and the Dems were just poor working folk struggling to get ahead.
I wonder, does "our" billionaire" keep his money offshore so as to not pay US taxes as yours does? I haven't heard Scaife's name since the 2004 election till today. Boy, he's sure at the front of everything.
Posted by: Lump | November 12, 2005 at 05:32 PM
I guess the right is worried when all they can do is attack Cindy Sheehan and their prez delivers an attack on the democrats...on Veterans Day. Shame on you Bush! Shame!
Prominent Democrats
* Representative Richard Gephardt, former House Minority Leader - Missouri Air National Guard, 1965-71. (1, 2)
* Representative David Bonior - Staff Sgt., United States Air Force 1968-72 (1, 2)
* Senate Minority Leader Tom Daschle - 1st Lt., U.S. Air Force SAC 1969-72 (1, 2)
* Former Vice President Al Gore - enlisted August 1969; sent to Vietnam January 1971 as an army journalist, assigned to the 20th Engineer Brigade headquartered at Bien Hoa, an airbase twenty miles northeast of Saigon. More facts about Gore's Service
* Former Senator Bob Kerrey... Democrat... Lt. j.g., U.S. Navy 1966-69; Medal of Honor, Vietnam (1, 2)
* Senator Daniel Inouye, US Army 1943-'47; Medal of Honor, World War Two (1, 2)
* Senator John Kerry, Lt., U.S. Navy 1966-70; Silver Star, Bronze Star with Combat V, and three awards of the Purple Heart for his service in combat (1)
* Representative Charles Rangel, Staff Sgt., U.S. Army 1948-52; Bronze Star, Korea (1, 2)
* Former Senator Max Cleland, Captain, U.S. Army 1965-68; Silver Star & Bronze Star, Vietnam (1, 2)
* Senator Ted Kennedy (D-MA) - U.S. Army, 1951-1953. (1)
* Senator Tom Harkin (D-IA) - Lt., U.S. Navy, 1962-67; Naval Reserve, 1968-74. (1, 2)
* Senator Jack Reed (D-RI) - U.S. Army Ranger, 1971-1979; Captain, Army Reserve 1979-91 (1)
* Senator Fritz Hollings (D-SC) - served as a U.S. Army officer in World War II, receiving the Bronze Star and seven campaign ribbons. (1)
* Representative Leonard Boswell (D-IA) - Lt. Col., U.S. Army 1956-76; two tours in Vietnam, two Distinguished Flying Crosses as a helicopter pilot, two Bronze Stars, and the Soldier's Medal. (1, 2)
* Former Representative "Pete" Peterson, Air Force Captain, POW, Ambassador to Viet Nam, and recipient of the Purple Heart, the Silver Star and the Legion of Merit. (1, 2)
* Rep. Mike Thompson, D-CA: Staff sergeant/platoon leader with the 173rd Airborne Brigade, U.S. Army; was wounded and received a Purple Heart. (1, 2)
* Bill McBride, Democratic Candidate for Florida Governor - volunteered and served as a U.S. Marine in Vietnam; awarded Bronze Star with a combat "V." (1)
* Gray Davis, former California Governor, Army Captain in Vietnam; received Bronze Star. (1)
* Pete Stark, D-CA, served in the Air Force 1955-57
* Wesley Clark, Democratic Presidential Candidate - lengthy military career.
George McGovern, famous liberal, awarded Silver Star & DFC, dozens of missions during WWII.
Posted by: chris | November 12, 2005 at 08:07 PM
Funny, the only time I heard Bush mention the word "Democrat" was when he said 100 of them supported the vote to authorize action against Iraq.
Isn't it interesting that he talks about how people that are trying to rewrite the history leading up to the war are undermining the mission of the troops and sending signals of weaknesses to the terrorists. And somehow, people on this post instantly link that to Democrats, even though Bush never made that link.
Posted by: ExDem | November 12, 2005 at 08:29 PM
Yes, he did....
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2005/11/20051111-1.html
"..While it's perfectly legitimate to criticize my decision or the conduct of the war, it is deeply irresponsible to rewrite the history of how that war began. (Applause.) Some Democrats and anti-war critics are now claiming we manipulated the intelligence and misled the American people about why we went to war. These critics are fully aware that a bipartisan Senate investigation found no evidence of political pressure to change the intelligence community's judgments related to Iraq's weapons programs"... He forgot that some in his own party feel he lied too
Posted by: chris | November 12, 2005 at 08:37 PM
Pat Robertson is kind of a misguided fellow. But, I do wish there were more responsible public officials that were guided by their faith. In Washington, we have a Governor that claims to be Catholic, yet she supports abortion.
I think it would be great if our state had the courage to elect a governor that wasn't afraid to publicly state how their faith guides their public policy and might even quote scripture. And that the person would take a stand against abortion, outlawing partial birth abortions and emphasizing abstinence education for teens. And it would be good to have someone that would stand up for the Constitution, even the 2nd Amendment. That's a candidate that both Republicans and Democrats could support for governor. Let's hope we are lucky enough to elect someone like that next time around, then we can all exult in that result.
Posted by: ExDem | November 12, 2005 at 08:46 PM
Conservatives are all for a religious person in office as long as that religion is Christian.
If a Wiccan, a Buddhist or..gasp..a Muslim were to run for office and put his or her beliefs on the forefront as determining how he or she would run the country...? hah.
Posted by: sparky | November 12, 2005 at 09:11 PM
The State of Washington isn't made up that way, Ellen Craswell tried it and it didn't work. Having the bible read by politicians in America is no different than Islamic fundalmentalists taking over politics in the east. Access to religion is not a problem here as most street corners in America have a church--it's when their agenda dosent go as quickly as they like, then they go jihad-like and want to blow up San Francisco or Okla City. The 2nd amendment is supported by people like Howard Dean, it isn't a question of taking your guns away. Canada has 10 million guns for 31 million people.
Posted by: chris | November 12, 2005 at 09:16 PM
By the way, before you try to tell us that our Founding Fathers were Christians..most were Deists. Thomas Jefferson was a Deist and he certainly didn't intend to place U.S. law on a mystical basis when he wrote "endowed by their Creator." He explicitly stated that the purpose of a government is to secure people's rights--THAT is the basis for the government he helped create. And it is an explicit repudiation of Christianity as a source of law: the fact that the government is there protect the rights of individuals means that the government isn't there to enforce Christianity.
Posted by: sparky | November 12, 2005 at 09:19 PM
I would think the Republicans would favor a candidate like that. Wouldn't the Democrats? Couldn't the Democrats get excited if a candidate like that won the governorship? Wouldn't that make headlines - representing a real change for our country?
Posted by: ExDem | November 12, 2005 at 09:28 PM
The framers of the Constitution didn't see it that way, some of the signers were secularists. It only serves the conservatives interest to have a religous zealot to do their bidding for them for polling,etc, most Americans feel religion is still a private matter.
Posted by: chris | November 12, 2005 at 09:35 PM
Oh, and we could also celebrate a governor that seeks to cut taxes.
Posted by: ExDem | November 12, 2005 at 10:38 PM
on whom? at what percent?
Posted by: chris | November 12, 2005 at 11:15 PM
Cut property tax for all homeowners and cut taxes on small businesses. Get rid of all car taxes, like Tim Eyeman has promoted. If additional tax revenues are ever needed, then increase the sales tax everyone pays. That would be fair.
Posted by: ExDem | November 13, 2005 at 01:07 AM
Eliminate all income taxes on individuals and businesses. Eliminate the social security taxes. Tax only wealth. Provide a $10,000 annual deduction on a persons net worth to protect the low income end of the society and then tax the remaining wealth at 5%. Wealth being the net worth of all real property, stocks, bonds, cars, etc. Then, while we are at it, do everything we can to make businesses profitable (a profit that businesses have to distribute as dividends every year). Prohibit employer provided employee benefits such as health insurance, pensions, etc. so that our businesses can compete on the world market without this overhead. Then, using the new wealth tax, provide basic health insurance, and social security benefits for everyone. Individuals would still be free to upgrade their health plans and retirement plans at their own expense. Impose tarriffs on foreign products and services to offset the lost tax on wealth going to other nations.
Posted by: Ron | November 13, 2005 at 07:09 AM
The wealthy would never stand for it--we now have more millionares and as a result, they get the poor to do their bidding for them, as always, via Bush' tax cuts which gave me basically no decrease while some of those 3 million, millionares saw 5 and six digit tax breaks. You would have to exterminate a lot of rich people, kicking and screaming to create a more fair system. The govt. has always catered to the wealthy because the US hasn't had the true class warfare yet. If it ever did, the rich would of wished that the NRA never got propped up like it has.
Posted by: chris | November 13, 2005 at 08:57 AM
If you didn't see your tax bill go down, then you didn't pay taxes to begin with. How much money do you make a year? You must be a student or someone that chooses to work part time. Anyone making over 20,000 a year got their taxes reduced by Bush. People at the lowest end of the tax scale paid 1/3 less in tax.
Posted by: PowderPuff | November 13, 2005 at 09:09 AM
I work full time, for a moderate wage, at a state job I have done for 25 years. During the Clinton administration, I got a refund every year that ranged from $800 to $1300. During the Bush administration that went down to $300 until this last year I PAID at tax time. On paper it looks like I should be bringing home a healthy paycheck, but my spending power decreases every year. My taxes have not been reduced--I have paid MORE, unless the IRS is just lying to me. I take every deduction allowed and I have a TSA , a Roth IRA and a state retirement plan. One of my friends saw her taxes reduced by 8$..so hey, you must be right.
Posted by: sparky | November 13, 2005 at 10:57 AM
I'll stop joshing around. That "dream" governor I was looking for actually just got elected - in Virginia.
It is encouraging to see the Democrats get on board with conservative movement. After all the public celebrating when they retained the governor's house in Virginia, I got curious and checked out the winner's positions. What a wonderful surprise to see how conservative he is and how the Democrats are holding him up as the future of their party. As a Catholic and a conservative, I would definitely support Tim Kaine. Glad to see the Democrats coming to their senses as well....
http://www.kaine2005.org/issues/
Posted by: ExDem | November 13, 2005 at 01:40 PM
You must be a terrible poker player
Posted by: sparky | November 13, 2005 at 02:10 PM
Just as Jim Jeffords came to his...
Posted by: chris | November 13, 2005 at 02:28 PM