TPMDC
Reid Re-Reposts Angle's Old Website -- Even After Threat Of Lawsuit
US Senate candidate Sharron Angle (R-NV) and Senator Harry Reid (D-NV)
Share
Send to a friend!
Harry Reid isn't letting threats of a lawsuit stop him -- he' sticking with his Web campaign against "the real Sharron Angle." After the Angle campaign sent the Reid camp a cease-and-desist letter last week demanding that they take down their reposting of Angle's old campaign website, the Reid camp has now made just a few modifications and put it right back up.
After she won Nevada's Republican Senate primary, Angle's campaign took down most of its website, and later replaced it with a relaunched (and somewhat toned down) version. But the Reid campaign saved the old version, and put up a website called "The Real Sharron Angle," reproducing the old content. Then on Friday, the Angle campaign sent them a cease-and-desist letter, alleging violation of copyrights for Reid having reposted Angle's old campaign literature.
The Angle campaign also claimed that by leaving fill-in boxes for e-mail addresses intact, the Reid campaign was in a position to gain contact information of Angle's supporters who were deceived into thinking this was actually her site. Angle spokesman Jerry Stacy said in a press release: "Make no mistake, the Reid campaign was forced to take this site down because they were breaking several laws and trying to deceive the voters."
The Reid campaign did initially take down the site, seemingly obeying the cease-and-desist, and rerouted users to one of their other anti-Angle sites. But now they're put it right back up, simply removing the sign-up fields, some formatting and other identifying marks. From the Reid campaign's press release:
Out of an abundance of caution, the Reid campaign decided to temporarily remove the website in question while we investigated their allegations. Well, the phony legal threats and the feigned indignation are over - and we're not going to let Sharron Angle retroactively censor Sharron Angle. The original website, including Angle in her own words on her dangerous and extreme agenda, has been re-launched at: www.TheRealSharronAngle.com.
Just to be clear to Sharron Angle and her handlers, it's called free speech and it's nearly absolute under the First Amendment. (We know, these "big Constitutional issues" are tough for you - like when you said separation of Church & State was "unconstitutional" exactly one week ago.)
"The question is: what will Sharron Angle do now to hide her extreme views on killing Social Security and eliminating the Department of Education from Nevada voters? Perhaps she's checking to see if there are any Second Amendment remedies," said Jon Summers, spokesman for the Reid campaign.
Here's a screen grab of the site:
Comments (178) | Join the Conversation!
Leave a comment
Follow us!
Most Popular
TPM Stories Now Surging on Digg.com
TPM Top News
© 2010 TPM Media LLC. All Rights Reserved.
It's Pat
July 6, 2010 5:58 PM
HA!! Nice!
Good press release, too. Go Reid!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
mJJ
July 7, 2010 2:48 AM in reply to It's Pat
I looked at the old site some time ago and I do not remember seeing any description of protected content or any comment that the post was copyrighted and not to be downloaded But then, perhaps Angle is just too silly to understand the rules. She put this garbage up and if she believes in it, she should be happy as a clam to have Reid broadcast it everywhere. But I guess she finally realizes she looks and sounds like a kook with some of her bizarre statements. But in the end, Sharon dear, they are your words and Reid did NOT doctor them up to make you look stupid. You did that all by yourself!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Ahmedsaid
July 7, 2010 5:48 AM in reply to It's Pat
It's inclear who is backing Harry Reid, but his pushers are Phanaeus vindex MacLachlan & Onthophagus gazella Fabricius, from the Entomology Institute, a liberal stink tank.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
lyris
July 7, 2010 11:56 AM in reply to Ahmedsaid
ahmedsaid, you are smelling the stench of the teabagging/gop.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
The Commenter Formerly Known as NCSteve
July 6, 2010 5:59 PM
Are you going to take that Sue? You need to sue these guys, and sue 'em good! I'm certain it will work out as well for you as Fox and O'Reilly's trademark infringement suit against Al Franken.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Knothead Jake
July 6, 2010 9:49 PM in reply to The Commenter Formerly Known as NCSteve
C'mon Sharon, ya shitheel, bust out the extra large shovel and start shoveling that money into the scumbag lawyer's pocket you hire to continue to make you look like a fool. From my view it's money well spent, from your view, maybe not so much.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Knothead Jake
July 6, 2010 9:50 PM in reply to The Commenter Formerly Known as NCSteve
C'mon Sharon, ya shitheel, bust out the extra large shovel and start shoveling that money into the scumbag lawyer's pocket you hire to continue to make you look like a fool. From my view it's money well spent, from your view, maybe not so much.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
lyris
July 7, 2010 11:58 AM in reply to Knothead Jake
Yeah, Jake that does bare repeating twice, and I agree with both posts.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
cwnidog
July 6, 2010 6:09 PM
Never has the saying "She can run, but she can't hide." been so appropriate.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
kawika49
July 7, 2010 3:34 AM in reply to cwnidog
It hurts so bad.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Signalman
July 6, 2010 6:09 PM
Oh yes.
Please please please throw me in that briar patch.
Love,
B'rer Rabbit
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
libdevil
July 6, 2010 6:09 PM
The contact info thing is a semi-legitimate complaint, and I'm glad they addressed that. The rest of it is pretty ridiculous.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
pgbach
July 6, 2010 6:17 PM in reply to libdevil
Not only is it ridiculous, Angle has no legal claim here.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
mcrose68
July 7, 2010 1:36 AM in reply to pgbach
The best thing about her strategy is that by claiming copy-right she has confirmed the content is hers. She can not dis-own the content now.
Not only does she have no legal claim to stop it, since I think this would fall squarely under "fair use" so long as it was clear this was a reporting of the old web-site as opposed to a direct publication of the old web-site. The Robert's Court, I am not, but I'm pretty sure that as long as they are commenting on it, it's fair use.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
George C
July 7, 2010 7:13 AM in reply to mcrose68
I agree on the "fair use". I'm not sure about whether it would be a violation to simply copy and re-post the old website. This is politics after all -- how can a political campaign try to copyright its speech in order to insulate it from attack by the other campaign? I'd feel better about Supreme Court review if Reid were a corporation.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
tinsk
July 7, 2010 9:16 AM in reply to George C
In the deep empty space of Palin tea party world, the first amendment protects a person's speech from challenge for accuracy and criticism.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Signalman
July 7, 2010 9:11 AM in reply to mcrose68
It seems that Angle has learned a little from her pals, the $cientologists. They like to use that 'it's copyrighted so you can't talk about it or disseminate it publicly or even COMMENT on it' argument a lot.
Screw the clams and screw Angle.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
jimson
July 6, 2010 6:16 PM
Go ahead and sue him-- thus bringing even more publicity to the right-wing views you desperately want to sweep under the rug.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
kawika49
July 7, 2010 3:40 AM in reply to jimson
And more expense.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
mJJ
July 6, 2010 6:17 PM
This woman has extreme ideas so I can appreciate how she hates Reid's re-postiung her own words. Wonder if her site was stamped with a "protected information" posting. Who knows where it will end, but it shows how silly this ditzy woman is to put up such a ridiculous site in the first place. Reid is just reposting HER OWN words. Guess even to her, her own words are very controversial or she would applaud Reid for posting them and make it work for her.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
lyris
July 7, 2010 12:05 PM in reply to mJJ
mJJ you posted earlier that you looked at her old website and saw no copyright on it. I could be wrong wouldn't that clear Sen Reid?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
marmaduke
July 9, 2010 4:29 AM in reply to mJJ
You're right, mJJ! It's amazing this woman's lack of gratitude.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
teadoust
July 6, 2010 6:18 PM
that's a pretty funny press release. nice to see reid sticking to his guns on this one.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
chameleon
July 6, 2010 6:52 PM in reply to teadoust
Fabulous avatar. That has to be the best picture of marilyn that I've seen.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
larsvanness
July 6, 2010 7:35 PM in reply to chameleon
Well, it looks like another Republican carpet bagger has come to the "silver state" lose her reputation to Harry Reid.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
chameleon
July 6, 2010 7:49 PM in reply to larsvanness
My friend. So good to see you. Yep.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Common Sense Caucus
July 6, 2010 6:23 PM
A lawsuit would be great. It would be Sharron Angle answering questions solely to do with hiding her own written policies. Not to mention, short of an unlikely injunction to take the site down, no lawsuit would come to a conclusion before November. This was great to put it back up. Make her sue you, and then laugh all the way to victory. What amateurs this clown posse are. Love it.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Walter Mitty
July 6, 2010 6:26 PM
Actually at the very bottom it says it was put up by the Nevada State Democratic Party and not authorized by any candidate or candidate committee.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Common Sense Caucus
July 6, 2010 6:27 PM
The second amendment remedies taunt is by far the best. None of the cowards that are the right would dare act on any of their rhetoric. I love the Reid campaign for this. Going to continue to donate to Harry and Rory.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
nomad28
July 6, 2010 6:28 PM
so, her views are 'extreme' because harry reid says so, huh? actually, her views (phasing out SS, for instance) have been held by other prominent republicans, most notably President Bush (remember him? the guy who won two presidential elections?) From the viewpoint of a flaming liberal, EVERY conservative position is "extreme." But, last I checked, recent polling shows that about 40% of the country self-identify as
"conservative," so i'm not too worried as to what liberal sites like this one, and the national media portray Angle's views. Luckily, they don't get to choose the next senator from NV. the people do.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Common Sense Caucus
July 6, 2010 6:37 PM in reply to nomad28
What are you high? SHE is the one terrified of her views. We love that SHE is terrified of her own views. Call the Angle campaign with your poll numbers, maybe they will stop cowering from their own shadow. LOL, you guys are all the same. Thank you from the bottom of my heart for working so hard to GUARANTEE indefinite Democratic majorities.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
nomad28
July 6, 2010 6:57 PM in reply to Common Sense Caucus
you don't think that all the fearmongering from the far-left media has anything to do with it, champ?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Common Sense Caucus
July 6, 2010 7:05 PM in reply to nomad28
Feel free to post Harry Reid's website all you want. In fact, it's still up in its entirety. www.HarryReid.com
Again, thank you all for being you. Way to blow this Senate race before it even began by nominating a joke of a human being.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
FellowAmerican
July 6, 2010 8:07 PM in reply to nomad28
"you don't think that all the fearmongering from the far-left media has anything to do with it"
The fearmongers are easily identified. They're the ones who call their opponents scary names: Socialist, Communist, Nazi. They call their opponents traitors who will sell out the country. They back off their scary claims when challenged with facts, and say "that's not *really* what I said when I said exactly that..."
Gosh, I don't think I've ever heard anyone seriously characterize progressives and liberals as fearmongers. I think a poll needs to be conducted, to learn who Americans associate with fearmongering. I bet the Tea Party wins 1st place, followed closely by their parents, the GOP.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
nomad28
July 6, 2010 8:21 PM in reply to FellowAmerican
I distinctly remember all of those Bush = Hitler signs during the Bush presidency. I guess those don't count, huh?
Hey, didn't Boxer recently say that if we don't pass cap+ trade legislation that there will be increased droughts, floods, global instability and conflict, food shortage, etc, etc. Yeah, no fearmongering there.
"Gosh, I don't think I've ever heard anyone seriously characterize progressives and liberals as fearmongers."
Maybe you should expand your reading list to include other sources of news and commentary that are not exclusively far-left.
"I think a poll needs to be conducted, to learn who Americans associate with fearmongering. I bet the Tea Party wins 1st place, followed closely by their parents, the GOP."
I would welcome such a poll.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
vasu
July 6, 2010 8:53 PM in reply to nomad28
What is funny is you glazed over the part where, "They back off their scary claims when challenged with facts, and say "that's not *really* what I said when I said exactly that..."
Also, if this is such a flaming liberal site? Why are you hear? It's obvious not to have civil discourse. But to bash other peoples opinions that fall outside your narrow mindset. We have 10+ years of republicans in power and what do we have now?
We have huge unemployment, massive debt from 2 wars that were not paid for. A disappearing middle class, and the top 1.5% of this country benefiting from it. Why? Not from the Democrats liberal agenda, to lift people up, provide them medical coverage and potentailly protect the people that can't protect themselves.
But instead we had an agenda of deregulation and unchecked spending, and yet only now are the republicans touting their "Fiscal Responcibility" and blocking unemployment help to those that badly needed, or from making an energy policy that brings jobs to the country and moves us from oil. OH NOES!!! THEY WANT CAP AND TRADE IT'S A TAX!
Keep going, keep touting the agenda that single-handlely brought the world to it's knees. Sent several countries spiraling into out of control and unsuported debt. Why? Because the regulators that were suppose to stop this didn't. Do we wanna touch on BP and MMS? Who at this point is killing the gulf?
No. I'm done. Anything I say to you is a waste of time, because it does no good. You won't step out of your narrow mindset and think of others, or try to look through someone else's eyes. Why, because those views scare you. So again I say, be gone from the liberal devil haven that is TPM and go play on the world daily nut.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
FellowAmerican
July 6, 2010 9:16 PM in reply to nomad28
"Hey, didn't Boxer recently say that if we don't pass cap+ trade legislation that there will be increased droughts, floods, global instability and conflict, food shortage, etc, etc. Yeah, no fearmongering there."
Using science-based predictions to say "if you do 'A', then 'B'" isn't fear-mongering. Any more than saying "if you breathe too much carbon dioxide, you'll choke to death". (Yes, carbon dioxide is a poison when there's too much, even if it occurs naturally in the atmosphere.) Rather, reporting the predictions of science-based methodologies is prudent planning. So much better than fairy tales such as "if we don't invade Iraq, we'll ALL DIE IN A HORRIBLE NUCLEAR EXPLOSION!"
I do remember the Bush = Hitler signs. Of course, they weren't the essence of the Democratic stand, and you didn't see NBC or ABC pushing that. But I do see Obama = Hitler on Fox constantly. I see many claims that the current administration == Nazism, which is obscene. The current administration, while having to deal with the war in Iraq, hasn't gratuitously invaded any countries.
Finally, I would point out that the Bush = Hitler sign was not intended to say he would gas 6 million. But it does correctly enshrine his jingoistic legacy of making war without provocation, and trying to significantly sidestep legislated controls on government overreaching. ("FISA? Not for me!") But the tea partiers who equate Obama with Hitler -- they're serious.
Which is why it's a bad idea for me to spend too much time dipping in the wells you favor for political 'insight'. It would be poisonous.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Dave Adams
July 7, 2010 12:14 AM in reply to nomad28
Uh huh. How about Bush telling us that "the next smoking gun could be a mushroom cloud"? Fearmongering. You want to equate a bunch of protesters with signs with our last Republican President and senior members of his Administration. Is that right? Bush and his buddies -the guys you Conservatives told us were the only ones who could save us- are on the same level with a bunch of modern-day hippies with hand-made signs? Is that how you think of Bush, Cheney Rice and their ilk?
Is that an example of the soft bigotry of low Conservative expectations?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
expat46
July 7, 2010 12:34 AM in reply to Dave Adams
+1
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Steaming Pile
July 7, 2010 8:53 AM in reply to nomad28
Let's see...PATRIOT Act, torture, starting wars for the hell of it, no real parallel here. Right.
Bush == Hitler was based on shit he actually did. What is Obama == Hitler based on?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
jeffgee
July 6, 2010 9:25 PM in reply to FellowAmerican
Don't forget the ever-popular "taken out of context" excuse
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
sparrowhawk
July 6, 2010 6:47 PM in reply to nomad28
Well, she did scrub them from her own site. If she does believe them, why is she complaining? She's either a phony or a coward, based on her actions. If these views aren't extreme, then Reid is doing Angle a favor.
Funny that you mention President Bush trying to phase out SS; how did that work out? I don't remember...oh, wait, it never came to a vote because the former President/Republicans know better than to actually go on the record in favor of it. Bush only pushed for it because he didn't have to worry about getting "elected" ever again.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Matt Jones
July 6, 2010 6:50 PM in reply to nomad28
They are "extreme" because even Angle's mainstream handlers have made her drop them - that's why she's fighting so hard to keep them off the web. Don't "the people" deserve to see what the candidates stand for, or do they only get to consider the carefully polished and sanitized version?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
BillSoo
July 6, 2010 6:52 PM in reply to nomad28
Well, yes, most republican politicians would like to phase out SS but how many make that public? The fact that SS is *popular*, even though it conflicts with conservative dogma, gives the right a problem where appeals to the base conflict with appeals to the general electorate. SS is one example of this but there are others as well. And all Reid is doing is making that public.
Now I would agree with you that at least 40% of the country identify as conservative. I would even believe a higher number. However, that does not mean that all of those people would support phasing out SS.
Anyway, I imagine that you do not consider phasing out SS to be extreme. Are there any positions of hers that you *do* consider extreme? Or at least disagree with? Just curious....
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
nomad28
July 6, 2010 7:13 PM in reply to BillSoo
Ok, so you acknowledge that phasing out SS is in the political conversation? Because most everyone else calls it an "extreme" position. I wouldn't call finding free-market alternatives to the SS an "extreme" position myself, but I guess to every rabid anti-capitalist-government-is-the-answer-to-everything statist, that's exactly what it is.
What I DO consider extreme is my own government forcing me to purchase a product (health care). Do you think that's extreme? or can the government "regulate" even things I don't ever plan to purchase? I live in a border town. I have relatives that are doctors that live across the border in Mexico. It's a 15 minute drive from my house to their clinic. They provide me with cheap, if not free, healthcare. Thusly, I don't pay for health insurance here in the States. However, with ObamaCare, i'll be forced to pay a penalty for not purchasing a plan. That's "extreme" to me.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
midnight rambler
July 6, 2010 7:26 PM in reply to nomad28
It's not in the political conversation, despite the fact that a lot of prominent Republicans would like to do it, because it's an extreme position among voters, even Republican voters.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
nomad28
July 6, 2010 7:41 PM in reply to midnight rambler
midnight,
So from that logic, ObamaCare should be repealed, right? doesn't polling show that it's extremely unpopular? when was mandating every citizen to purchase health insurance EVER in the political conversation, except for the power grab by the Dems? I had never heard ANY democrat espouse that position until ObamaCare came down the pike.
Just because Chris Matthews says it's extreme, doesn't mean that it is. As a matter of fact, I've got a little rule of thumb that I go by. Whatever I hear from MSNBC, I pretty much believe the opposite.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Bwakfat
July 6, 2010 10:19 PM in reply to nomad28
Don't you want people, your countrymen, who don't have the luck to have doctor relatives across the border to have your level of healthcare? If not, why not?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
LisB
July 6, 2010 11:28 PM in reply to nomad28
No, actually polling shows it's becoming more popular.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Forrest
July 7, 2010 2:58 AM in reply to nomad28
"when was mandating every citizen to purchase health insurance EVER in the political conversation, except for the power grab by the Dems?"
Circa 1994, when the mandate was the conservative, free market answer to the liberal push for the evil single payer government solution.
http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/48xx/doc4816/doc38.pdf
I hope the fact that the CBO did a study on it is proof enough that it was 'ever in the political conversation'.
If you're going to bother posting here, at least be right. Your current behavior is akin to walking into a lion's den wearing a meat suit.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
slb
July 7, 2010 4:32 AM in reply to nomad28
when was mandating every citizen to purchase health insurance EVER in the political conversation, except for the power grab by the Dems? I had never heard ANY democrat espouse that position until ObamaCare came down the pike.
Obviously, you weren't paying attention during the 2008 primary and election campaigns. Mandates were part of the health care plans of both Hillary Clinton and John Edwards. There was a good deal of discussion of the pros and cons of mandates.
A mandate was also part of the Massachusetts health care plan passed under the governorship of Mitt Romney, and as someone else pointed out, mandated coverage was part of the conservative alternative to the health care plan the Clintons put forward in the 90s -- and that alternative was put forward by none other than John McCain.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
John M
July 7, 2010 6:30 AM in reply to nomad28
1 in 3 who are unhappy with the health care bill are unhappy BECAUSE IT DOES NOT GO FAR ENOUGH.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Sniffit
July 7, 2010 1:35 PM in reply to John M
Indeed. The whole conservative talking point brain fart about "ObamaCare" being "sosuhlizm!" is nothing more than nonsense. The reality is that, while many of us have no problem with a health care mandate in principle, we've got a real fucking problem with a health care mandate that equates to a giant forced deepthroating of the insurance industry...and the worst part, of course, is that we all know that the insurance industry has had it's dick in the middle class's ass for the past 5-6 decades, so nobody in their right mind should be enjoying having to go at it face first.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
cinesimon
July 6, 2010 7:26 PM in reply to nomad28
"What I DO consider extreme is my own government forcing me to purchase a product (health care)."
What I consider utterly bizarre is why you think it's OK for the taxpayers to foot the bill if you have an accident and require medical attention.
If privatizing SS is "in the conversation", then why is Angle trying to remove it from said conversation? And please name one other republican who uses it as a part of their election campaign.
Then, kindly provide the numbers which state such an idea isn't incredibly unpopular with people of all political persuasion? It's the most popular government program that exists. Not to mention the fact that in reality-land, it's the single most effective form of stimulus.
But hey - no surprise brainless idiots would want to get rid of something that's actually good for society in a fake attempt at righteous austerity, whilst simultaneously providing corporations the equivalent of slave labor...
And why aren't you celebrating that Angle's real views are on display courtesy of the Reid campaign? I see you refuse to respond to that, instead using silly disingenuous nonsense to change the subject...
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
heir ball
July 6, 2010 7:50 PM in reply to cinesimon
I’m sorry I had to chime in here, if you know anything about insurance, one of the keys to the whole thing is insuring everybody, not just the people who need it. The law of large numbers etc, so I don’t think it’s radical at all to make people buy insurance for the benefit of everyone. I’m sure you believe in the market right, or no? Maybe you don’t believe in the market here because it doesn’t fit your “conservative” profile. Well, if more people buy insurance, the price goes down right? Right? So you can get “cheap” healthcare in Mexico, so we shouldn’t get our act together as a nation and get healthcare for everybody? I’ll bet you call yourself a Christian too. Go ahead, just have it both ways.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
heir ball
July 6, 2010 7:55 PM in reply to heir ball
I meant to reply to nomad28, but you get the idea.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
nomad28
July 6, 2010 8:09 PM in reply to heir ball
Wow. Your ignorance of the subject matter is astounding. So you believe that the federal government has the right to regulate anything, as long as it's for the country's own good? Can the federal government mandate that we all join Weight Watchers? I mean, obesity is out of control, is it not? Wouldn't that "benefit" everyone?
I do believe in free-market principles. What ObamaCare offers is anything but that. I thought the purpose of ObamaCare was to rein in exploding health care costs. Isn't that what Obama keeps on saying? It will actually do the opposite. It will penalize us for not purchasing product, but you seem ok with it.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
heir ball
July 6, 2010 8:17 PM in reply to nomad28
Sir, it was precisely your astounding ignorance that got me off the sidelines to say something. No argument here brother, nobody to argue with…
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
nomad28
July 6, 2010 8:28 PM in reply to heir ball
heirball,
you didn't answer my question. So you're OK with the federal government having such overreaching powers?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
heir ball
July 6, 2010 8:37 PM in reply to nomad28
No, I think you should pay for Weightwatchers on your dime, fatass.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
vasu
July 6, 2010 9:07 PM in reply to heir ball
So here I come again, heir ball I would like to support you in this, because it's been said by several republicans over and over again.
We do have heathcare in this country. If you get in accident and are taken to a hospital, by law, they have to make sure you are stable, and then ship you to a county hospital. Lets not mind that fact that the cost of the first visit goes on the tax payers, but the transportation to a county hospital, the drugs used to that patient stable and alive all out of thin air right?
Oh wait, we have to pay for that? Why because the person doesn't have health care.
And after all the republicans did to help this country over the last 10 yrs has left this person jobless and unable to pay. So who eats the cost? the local community. Why? Because we have laws that state we can't just let people die in the street. And as to the "fine" you all talk about. IT'S NOT A FINE WHEN IT COUNTS AS A DEDCUTION ON YOUR TAXES!
If you have healthcare insurance you get a credit on your taxes, if not you don't get that credit. With your logic, the fact that I don't have kids, is a fine, the fact that I don't own a house yet is a fine. Do i need to keep going?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
PSzymeczek
July 7, 2010 12:59 PM in reply to vasu
Good luck getting a cancer screening or other prevetive care in the ER.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
jeffgee
July 6, 2010 9:31 PM in reply to nomad28
In health insurance, the current "free market" driven heath insurance industry finds it in shareholders' interest to exclude people deemed to be too high a risk to offer any coverage at all.
Is this a good thing that should continue, nomad?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Doc Magnus
July 6, 2010 11:25 PM in reply to nomad28
I have known conservatives like you. Always wrong. Always funny. Don't expect a reply beyond this, you colossal waste of time.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
John M
July 7, 2010 6:39 AM in reply to nomad28
Which is the exact reason that a single payer system should have been implimented. We Canadians have ten times better health care than the insurance takeover of American health care gives Americans. 1.5 million Americans a year come to Canada for the health care that they are denied because insurance company bureaucrats, not physicians, decide who gets treatment and what treatment they get in the United States. Even Sarah Palin used to travel 122 miles to Whitehorse Yukon for Canadian health care instead of going 90 milesto Juneau fo inferior American insurance run health care. Canada has had a government funded single payer health care system since 1966, when Sarah Palin was 22 months old (and I was 16 years old).
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
BillSoo
July 7, 2010 2:38 PM in reply to John M
Do you have a cite for the 1.5 million? It would be a useful link to have for future comments....
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
kawika49
July 7, 2010 6:58 AM in reply to nomad28
You're right, every one has a right to die because they have a malady that is too expensive.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
BillSoo
July 7, 2010 2:41 PM in reply to kawika49
Can you clarify your remark please? I've read it several times and I can't decide if you are reiterating the right wing talking point of "Canadian death panels" or talking about the current system in the US of only the rich get health care.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
nomad28
July 6, 2010 7:58 PM in reply to cinesimon
cinesimo,
You said: "What I consider utterly bizarre is why you think it's OK for the taxpayers to foot the bill if you have an accident and require medical attention."
When did I say that? And, by the way, are you suggesting that the only way to prevent the taxpayers from "footing the bill," as you put it, is to require said taxpayer to purchase a product?
If privatizing SS is "in the conversation", then why is Angle trying to remove it from said conversation? And please name one other republican who uses it as a part of their election campaign.
Easy. Rep. Ryan, Ranking Member of the House Budget Committee, introduced a "Roadmap to America's Future." Part of that Roadmap includes reforming the SS system by privatizing it. I'm surprised you haven't heard of it. You should read up on it.
"Then, kindly provide the numbers which state such an idea isn't incredibly unpopular with people of all political persuasion?"
The onus is on you buddy. You're the one that's spouting that her views are extreme. Prove to me that that's the case. And please don't regurgitate talking points.
"It's the most popular government program that exists. Not to mention the fact that in reality-land, it's the single most effective form of stimulus."
Are we talking about the same program that will go bankrupt in 10 years? the republicans want to privatize it to prevent it from going bankrupt. You think that's an extreme position. What would you do? it's in an unsustainable course as is. Something's gotta be done. What say you?
"But hey - no surprise brainless idiots would want to get rid of something that's actually good for society in a fake attempt at righteous austerity, whilst simultaneously providing corporations the equivalent of slave labor..."
Brainless idiot? Let's compare resumes. What the hell are you talking about????
"And why aren't you celebrating that Angle's real views are on display courtesy of the Reid campaign? I see you refuse to respond to that, instead using silly disingenuous nonsense to change the subject..."
Because people like you and TPM, and the WaPo, and the NY Times and MSNBC distort her views. Just watching Chris Matthews for 20 seconds makes me want to puke.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
BL
July 6, 2010 8:11 PM in reply to nomad28
"Are we talking about the same program that will go bankrupt in 10 years? the republicans want to privatize it to prevent it from going bankrupt. You think that's an extreme position. What would you do? it's in an unsustainable course as is. Something's gotta be done. What say you?"
Let's be realistic for a moment. When your car breaks down, do you tow it to the dump? Privatizing Social Security makes Social Security go away. So, pray tell, how does making Social Security go away entirely in any way constitute preventing it from going bankrupt?
Are you willing to privatize Social Security without seeing any of the money you have put into it up to this point? 'Cause if you think the GOP is going to give you any of that money, you're being taken for a ride across a bridge to nowhere.
I'm happy to be part of the endangered 60% who are NOT conservative, and I'll keep paying into SS for the sake of my grandparents, thank you very much.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
sj
July 6, 2010 11:14 PM in reply to nomad28
"Are we talking about the same program that will go bankrupt in 10 years? the republicans want to privatize it to prevent it from going bankrupt."
Actually, it's not going bankrupt or otherwise running out of money in anything like ten years. What IS happening in about ten years is that it will stop running an annual surplus. That's no problem, since the general funds owe the SS fund enough money to keep the program going for many years after that. That money, of course, was borrowed to finance the Bush tax cuts, one of the most disgusting pieces of government profligacy to ever occur. The reason Bush went for "reform" of the SS system was to avoid the necessity of paying that money back.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
martis
July 7, 2010 3:59 AM in reply to nomad28
nomad - you are astoundingly stupid. SS is not a funded system meaning that workers paying in today are responsible for paying out the near term recipients. if you were to privatize the system now, meaning current workers start putting their SS contributions into private accounts, then the taxpayer would be on the hook for hundreds of billions of unfunded SS liabilities for the baby boomers who are about to retire en masse. If the Repubs want to make that value proposition to the voter then GO FOR IT. You will ensure a Democratic party majority for the next decade. Just stop posting here because you are really really uninformed on the basic facts.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
slb
July 7, 2010 4:40 AM in reply to nomad28
Rep. Ryan, Ranking Member of the House Budget Committee, introduced a "Roadmap to America's Future." Part of that Roadmap includes reforming the SS system by privatizing it. I'm surprised you haven't heard of it. You should read up on it.
And the Republican leadership have been furiously trying to distance themselves from that "roadmap" ever since it came out, insisting that it represents only the opinion of Congressman Ryan and not the Republican Party as a whole.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Hank
July 6, 2010 8:18 PM in reply to nomad28
Then you should move to Mexico if you don't want to be a part of this community.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
BillSoo
July 6, 2010 8:29 PM in reply to nomad28
SS is in the political conversation to a certain segment of the population. We're talking about it after all....
But in general, not too many politicians will say anything bad about it. An exception is Congressman Ryan, whose mini budget had privatization of SS and HC part of his plan to tame the deficit. I may disagree with his plan (and I do) but I do applaud his willingness to express his ideas. In contrast, his party leader, Boehner, has backed away from this plan, calling it not republican policy while at the same time refusing to specifically state what parts he disagrees with.
Is phasing out SS extreme? Depends I suppose on what you propose to replace it with. At one time, the idea of replacing it with stocks or bonds tied to the market was openly debated and considered possible, maybe even probable. But now, in the wake of the big crash, that same position is considered extreme by many. Once burned, twice shy and all that....
Finally, about HCR. I hear you when you say that you have made your own way that your preventative care is covered by your Mexican contacts, but there is still a chance you will be in an accident in the US. That you will end up in emergency with no insurance. At that point, the government will pay to fix you up. Isn't it fair that you pay towards that cost?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Dave Adams
July 7, 2010 12:31 AM in reply to BillSoo
Look Bill, Nomad has his health care taken care of. As long as you live on the border and have foreign medical practioners in your family, what the hell's the problem? Don't 'cah get it? Nomad's got it handled, so screw everyone else.
Which is simply the Conservativee ideology distilled to its essence:
"I got mine. Screw you".
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
BillSoo
July 7, 2010 2:27 PM in reply to Dave Adams
I have heard that before, and there seems to be some truth to it. But like any simplification, it ignores nuance.
Look, TPM is what I would call a center-left site (not pure left like, say, DailyKOS). Still, it is unusual to get right wing viewpoints here. For one to show up requires some courage and conviction that one's viewpoint is correct. Rather than engage in invective or talking points, I see it as an opportunity to investigate where those convictions come from.
Similarly, I have gone onto right-wing sites to engage the posters there, but the level of discourse is very low. In my experience, talking to those conservatives confident enough to venture to left-wing sites seems to yield the best discussions.
But why bother? Well, as Rachel Maddow has said, discussion with those of different points of view only serves to make your arguments stronger since weak arguments are exposed and discarded. I think nomad28 is wrong but I don't *know* that. He might be right in some ways. The only way to find out is to engage in discussion.
So while your premise of "I got mine, screw you" may well be correct, I'd like to look deeper to see if there is more to it than that.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Publishermike
July 6, 2010 8:43 PM in reply to nomad28
Nomad, when you suffer a heart attack at midnight with no insurance, I'm sure that you will be more than happy to drive yourself over to the free clinic. Aint' America as a conservative wonderland great?!?!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
thomas1
July 7, 2010 9:15 AM in reply to nomad28
so it's extreme for the gvt to force you to purchase health care. Is it extreme for the gvt to force you to purchase auto insurance?
My favorite thing about those who worship at the alter of St Ronnie is that "it's all about ME". What I want. "It's my money."
If they want to drive a nice car; they're willing to pay for it. If they wnat to live in a nice house; they're willing to pay for it. But they want to live int the best country in the world and think it should be FREE.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
It's Pat
July 6, 2010 7:05 PM in reply to nomad28
So then Angle should not be scared of owning her positions nor of Reid pointing them out.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Overreach THIS!
July 6, 2010 10:27 PM in reply to It's Pat
Exactly. It should be a great thing for her.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Lapsed Catholic
July 6, 2010 7:41 PM in reply to nomad28
"her views (phasing out SS, for instance) have been held by other prominent republicans, most notably President Bush (remember him? the guy who won two presidential elections?)"
Bush didn't say a word about his SS phaseout campaign until right after his re-election.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Davran
July 6, 2010 9:12 PM in reply to Lapsed Catholic
You forget: IOKIYAR.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
larsvanness
July 6, 2010 7:42 PM in reply to nomad28
Oh and does that mean that the other 60% are "librul? Just checkin' yer facts.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
nomad28
July 6, 2010 8:31 PM in reply to larsvanness
nope. only 20%. the rest are considered moderate in their views.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
BillSoo
July 7, 2010 3:10 PM in reply to nomad28
True. But on the other hand, the numbers haven't changed much over the years. It's been around 40% conservative, 20% liberal for the last 8 years, according to Gallup:
http://www.gallup.com/poll/120857/conservatives-single-largest-ideological-group.aspx
Which, if you think about it, is pretty much as it should be. Progressives (or liberals if you wish) should be a minority of any population because the number of people willing to try new ways or different things is always going to be less than the number of people who think "if it's good enough for my dad it's good enough for me". It's just human nature.
The big surprise to me is that with their 20% base, liberals have been able to win the vast majority of moderates over to their side. Given the inherent advantage of the conservatives, it is evidence that the relative weight of argument on the liberal side is greater than that on the conservative side.
Rather than address this discrepancy, it appears (to me) that republicans seem to expect their views to prevail by divine right rather than by strong reason. Rather than develop strong, coherent policies to challenge the liberal agenda it seems that conservatives find it easier to accuse the media or Acorn of putting a thumb on the scales.
That's why I like Ryan. His budget is terrible, but at least he has a policy plan. That's the first step. The second step is to adjust the plan in the face of reality. We shall see if he has this ability. I think he does, but the current "purist" climate on the right will not make it easy for him.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
larsvanness
July 6, 2010 7:59 PM in reply to nomad28
In my humble opinion this qualifies her as extreme: Sharron Angle, the Tea Party candidate turned Republican primary winner in Nevada, has taken heat for a number of extreme affiliations and policy positions. One of the more outlandish was a statement she made during a radio interview last January in which she floated the idea that the public would bring down an out-of-control Congress with "Second Amendment remedies."
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
jeffgee
July 6, 2010 9:36 PM in reply to larsvanness
If she truly meant "Second Amendment" remedies, that would refer to a well-regulated militia. The Tea Party morons and backwoods militias wouldn't allow themselves to be well-regulated. Regulation is repression, doncha know.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Hank
July 6, 2010 8:16 PM in reply to nomad28
We'll all be dead a thousand years before Social Security is phased out. It ain't called the third rail of American Politics for nothing.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Quitty
July 6, 2010 8:22 PM in reply to nomad28
...most notably President Bush (remember him? the guy who won two presidential elections?)
That's your view and I'd say it's extreme. Bush was appointed by the Supreme Court following the first election. And many of us are still convinced he stole the second election.
You might call that beating a dead horse, but I sure as hell wouldn't hang my support of phasing out Social Security on Bush's having won two presidential elections!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
mJJ
July 6, 2010 8:34 PM in reply to nomad28
No, her views are extreme because guess what, her views are extreme. Reid is not making anything up. She posted this garbage to start with. Unless she copyrighted her site, Reid's posting of it is a freebee that she should have foreseen. But is she now denying her point of view? Has she flip flopped on this issue? She is the one looking very ditzy and she needs to get a hold of her campaign before she lets Reid run away with this election. This election was hers to lose and it looks like she pretty much has done exactly that.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
FreemanW
July 6, 2010 8:55 PM in reply to nomad28
Do you think they're extreme?
Why won't Sharron own up to the policies that she has so vociferously advocated?
Abolish Social Security and Medicare.
Let "Free-Markets" rule (there is no "Free-Market" anywhere)
Abolish Regulations on industry ('cause it worked so well for Wall Street and Big Oil)
Abolish the IRS
Cut back on taxation (see above), cut back on spending -- yeah, with no income, duh, audit the Federal Reserve -- why, to find out how much money we owe and cannot pay back 'cause there is no income stream?
Equip the U.S. Military with the BEST POSSIBLE WEAPONS -- and Sharron is going to buy those weapons with WHAT exactly?
Improved compensation for all Military Veterans -- paid for with the same silly money that she pulls out of her ass.
This could go on for much longer, almost as long as Sharron Angle is CRAZEEE.
But why won't she champion her policy positions?
Why is she leaving the publicity all up to Harry Reid?
Is it because her positions are Main Stream and she is ashamed of being so main stream in front of her fellow Tea Baggers?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Overreach THIS!
July 6, 2010 10:38 PM in reply to FreemanW
And don't forget them Second Amendment Remedies that kick in for her in case she doesn't get her way.
It works for Bin Laden, after all.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
mcrose68
July 7, 2010 1:42 AM in reply to nomad28
LOL!!!
Nomad - we're talking Nevada here.
You can't suggest something that unlikely without someone challenging you to put your money where your mouth is.
So, here I am asking - Do you want to put a friendly wager on the outcome of the NV Senate election?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
bosdcla14
July 7, 2010 3:07 AM in reply to nomad28
Um, Nomad, if her views aren't extreme or damaging, why is she threatening to sue Harry Reid to try to keep him from simply reposting her website? Is she just naturally litigious?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Red XIV
July 9, 2010 2:02 AM in reply to nomad28
Phasing out Social Security is off-the-kook-end extreme. Bush got smacked down hard when he tried to do it, despite having perhaps the most submissive Congressional majority in history to work with.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
fafner1
July 6, 2010 6:31 PM
So Angle is going to sue Reid for disclosing views she previously made public. Maybe she should sue herself for disclosing her views in the first place. Anyway, see you in court, Sharron!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
FellowAmerican
July 6, 2010 6:33 PM
Her lawyer must be Orly Taitz.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
ariuszme
July 6, 2010 7:00 PM in reply to FellowAmerican
LMAO !
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
form990
July 7, 2010 8:05 AM in reply to FellowAmerican
Suing over copyright has been classic Scientology go-to litigation for decades. FWIW, given that she has something of a history wrt having used their playbook on other matters.
I very much doubt that those massages for convicts are what most people would call massages if they're a part of Second Chance, btw. That program is pretty much just another name for Narconon, which is itself pretty much just another name for Scientology's Purification Rundown. Which isn't exactly a deluxe and cushy spa treatment. To put it mildly.
But I digress.
My point is that she's closely associated to an entity that has years and years and years of precedent with exactly the kind of litigation she's opting for. And that might have implications for how she'll pursue it if she does in fact turn out to be using their playbook.
Although if you're interested in reading about Narconon, this link...
http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~dst/Narconon/
...goes to a reasonably comprehensive site.
But it's not anything anyone absolutely has to know to understand Sharon Angle or anything like that. I'm just erring on the side of inclusion.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
DrToast
July 6, 2010 6:38 PM
Heh...I think Reid is hoping Angle sues him.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Walter Mitty
July 6, 2010 6:50 PM in reply to DrToast
Would have to sue
Which would eat up her money and energy while not effecting Reid at all.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
July 6, 2010 6:40 PM
Go ahead. Make my day.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
The Hitman
July 6, 2010 6:54 PM
The fair use of a copyrighted work ... for purposes such as criticism, comment , news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright . In determining whether the use made of a work in any particular case is a fair use the factors to be considered shall include —
(1) the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes;
(2) the nature of the copyrighted work;
(3) the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and
(4) the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work.
17 USC 107. My favorite statute on the books. You don't need a law degree to realize she has no claim.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
jdb316
July 6, 2010 7:11 PM in reply to The Hitman
It's not about whether or not she has a claim. It's about her trying to fire up her base and score some sympathy votes from moderates (such as they are these days) who aren't eager to vote for Reid again but think Angle is a nutjob.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
ariuszme
July 6, 2010 7:01 PM
Meanwhile, SCOTUS Thomas's wife is a full blooded Teabagger out to take down Obama.
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0710/39426.html
No integrity left in the SCOTUS whatsoever
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Matt Jones
July 6, 2010 8:33 PM in reply to ariuszme
I love how she's running a "grass-roots group" that got its funding from exactly two donations (one of $50k and the other of half a million). Nothing says "regular American" to me like being able to cut a $500k check as a political contribution - everybody does that, amirite?
BTW: I'd love to hear her thoughts on the fact that substantial parts of the "movement" believe that she shouldn't have been able to marry her husband.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
OhioMan
July 7, 2010 7:35 AM in reply to Matt Jones
Why would any normal, thinking woman be a republican anyway? The party is firmly against women's rights.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
BillSoo
July 7, 2010 3:24 PM in reply to OhioMan
Different value systems.
If your overriding priority is, say, pay equity, then yeah, you'd have to be a moron to be a republican. But if your overriding priority is, say, abortion, then you can probably overlook the other stuff to vote republican.
BTW: Abortion and gay marriage are the two planks in the republican platform that really puzzle me. You'd think a small government party would be *against* government intervention in a woman's right to choose or in two individuals right to marry.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
jdb316
July 6, 2010 7:02 PM
Funny what facing the loss of one's power, and the perks that come with it, can do to a politician. Where the hell was this fight and temerity from Harry Reid when the health care reform bill was up in the Senate and Ben Nelson and Joe Lieberman were being so disingenuous?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
HusseinTenaX
July 6, 2010 7:22 PM in reply to jdb316
Excuse me but I think Harry brought that bill in for us, finally.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
kgb999
July 6, 2010 7:25 PM in reply to jdb316
He was backing up Obama. It kind of pisses me off that he did, but I understand why. He's the leader of the Senate. Going to war with the White House would not have helped pass a better bill when Obama was promising to protect the likes of Nelson, Lincoln and Lieberman. A civil war would also have made a clearly terrible election year even worse for the Democrats.
But anyone who didn't expect Reid to tear the GOPper running against him apart just doesn't know Harry Reid. He's a dirty fighter.
I also suspect you are going to see a different dynamic when the elections are done. Reid needs the win (after everyone counted him out) in the face of Rham's losses to demand Obama's political meddlers stop undermining his leadership of the Senate caucus.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
HusseinTenaX
July 6, 2010 7:07 PM
Well well - I guess Harry just made fools out of everybody who thinks he's nothing but wuss and all useless and stuff.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
It's Pat
July 6, 2010 7:36 PM in reply to HusseinTenaX
Give them time.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
jsdc007
July 6, 2010 7:15 PM
How does it feel to be "teabagged" by old, wrinkly Harry Reid, Sharon?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
BrownEye
July 6, 2010 7:29 PM
Good for you Harry. Heh heh heh. Stop Fox.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
eve
July 6, 2010 7:30 PM
love that press release
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Douglashh
July 6, 2010 7:34 PM
Finally a Democrat has Cajones. It's about time the Democrats stand up to the right wing and not slink off into the bushes and hide when criticized.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
WaitWut?
July 6, 2010 7:44 PM
"...was forced to take this site down because they were breaking several laws and trying to deceive the voters."
Deceive the voters? With your very own words, Sharron?
AAAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!! Go HARRY!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
chameleon
July 6, 2010 7:50 PM in reply to WaitWut?
Long time no see Wait-Wut
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Backcountry
July 6, 2010 7:44 PM
If Harry keeps it up, I'll have to stop calling him the "wimpinator."
It gives me hope he's finally found some backbone.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
July 6, 2010 7:59 PM
I'm not sure why anyone could support Harry "the war is lost" Reid.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
eb123
July 6, 2010 8:20 PM
Why is the web site "The Real Sharron Angle" so slow to load? It takes forever. Is it THAT popular??
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Viva!America!
July 6, 2010 8:39 PM in reply to eb123
good, its not just me. It must be very popular.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
It's Pat
July 6, 2010 9:03 PM in reply to eb123
Loads fine for me.
TPM takes a long time to load on my computer.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Davran
July 6, 2010 9:16 PM in reply to eb123
"TheRealSharonAngle.com" is pretty much made up of images of text, rather than actual text. That'll slow it down a fair bit.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
clemenceau
July 6, 2010 8:30 PM
Atta boy!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
timba
July 6, 2010 8:33 PM
It's a good idea, but Reid, as usual, is so lame that he's mucked up the mechanics - the site is so slow as to be completely unreadable.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Rojo Johnson
July 6, 2010 8:45 PM in reply to timba
Olbermann must be talking about it and everyone is rushing to read it. Either that or O'Rly is talking about it in a negative light.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
slb
July 7, 2010 4:52 AM in reply to Rojo Johnson
In fact you are right -- Olbermann did feature this on his Tuesday night show.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
eve
July 6, 2010 10:42 PM in reply to timba
Maybe it is a bit slow because so many sites have linked to it.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
kasper11
July 6, 2010 9:14 PM
She is such a tool...all she does by sending a cease and desist letter is drive traffic to the site and put the focus on the exact issues Reid wants. We can only hope all Republicans are this bad.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Backcountry
July 6, 2010 9:21 PM
Well, after taking a look at it, I must say I can't believe how poor her old site was designed! I mean, have they ever heard of breaking material up into multiple pages?
If she spent anything for the design of that old site it was too much! This says something about her judgment and ability to communicate also.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
slb
July 7, 2010 4:55 AM in reply to Backcountry
That's one reason the party stepped in to re-design her site.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
July 6, 2010 9:34 PM
Why on earth would they replace it with a serious of 1mb+ images? I mean, really. Even on my high speed connection, it takes a considerable and noticeable amount of time to load. No way I'm sitting there -- I've already lost interest.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
July 6, 2010 9:36 PM in reply to Dylan
*Series, or whatever.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
kunda311
July 6, 2010 9:38 PM
Nomad68, you are a moron of the first order. By all means go on believing that, a) conservatives are a solid majority nationwide, b) conservative philosophy and thinking is superior, c) the current economic and political woes are Clinton and/or Obama's fault, since Republicans can do no wrong, d) the ass-whooping Republicans will get in November (again) will be due to anything other than the majority of the country waking up and smelling another steaming pile of Republican bullshit.
After all, you guys hate government, and so have "starved the beast" and done your best to be supremely incompetent and corrupt, hence proving that government is loathsome. Now SYFPH and let real adults and mature human beings govern for a change.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
concerned parent
July 6, 2010 10:02 PM in reply to kunda311
Don't forget to mention it is conservatives who are the first to beg for money when their states are broke. There is a reason red states are both poor and undereducated and continue to produce generations of half-wits. They deny evolution because the evolutionary train has left the station and they are still looking for the ticket booth. At one point in history 99.999% of the world population thought the earth was both flat and the center of the universe. I think this time it will be the tea baggers who fall flat.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
slb
July 7, 2010 4:58 AM in reply to kunda311
I think you're being overly optimistic. I think the Democrats will almost certainly lose seats in both houses in November. I don't think it's going to be the complete rout that Republicans are expecting, though.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
xargaw
July 6, 2010 10:26 PM
If only Harry had this much hootspa as Majority Leader.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Overreach THIS!
July 6, 2010 10:34 PM in reply to xargaw
I expected, honestly, for someone to come on here to say, "Sorry I said some many times ad nauseum that Harry Reid has no balls."
I mean, where are all of those commenters?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
labman57
July 6, 2010 10:35 PM in reply to xargaw
Owls have hootspa. People have Chutzpah.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Barry Champlain
July 7, 2010 12:48 PM in reply to labman57
A hootspa is where said owl goes to relax and be pampered.
[bowing]
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
labman57
July 6, 2010 10:33 PM
Perhaps Angle can be the test subject for a new series on ABC -- Extreme Makeover, Politician Edition.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Middleclassvotingbloc
July 6, 2010 11:06 PM
Great job!!! Congradulations to the Reid campaign for standing up. Just as I said in my last post; make them fight, make them spend their donors' money for legal fees, while at the same time the Reid campaign can capture the attention that they need to bring attention to Angle's Flea Bagger extreme views.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Middleclassvotingbloc
July 6, 2010 11:16 PM
Harry, continue to use her words against her every chance you get. Show them over and over. Sane people can not allow this woman to be elected. Stay strong and don't back down, never, never back down.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
JDinBalt
July 7, 2010 12:03 AM
I gotta admit, Reid is starting to surprise me with his notable lack of spinelessness. The site's back up, yes!
Screw you, Angle! Your opinions are NOT copyrightable.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
maya89
July 7, 2010 12:08 AM
this woman is totally off her rocker.. can you imagine what would happen if every candidate for office who doesn't like what their opponent says about them.. doesn't like -- in this case -- when they're quoted by their opponent -- would sue their opponent.. well, we are a very litigious society after all..;-) this country has half of all the world's lawyers.. I guess this would give them something more to do...;-)
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
expat46
July 7, 2010 12:41 AM
I'd LOVE to be a fly on the wall in Angle's campaign meeting about this subject. I'll bet we've heard the last about this subject from the Angle campaign, I think they'll try to drop quietly drop it.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
laborlawyer
July 7, 2010 1:42 AM
In response to Nomad- I am all for Republicans having the courage of their convictions. I WANT a debate on whether or not to "transition out" Social Security and Medicare. I WANT you to boast of Phylis Schafly's endorsement and run on banning abortion even in cases of rape and incest. I WANT Republicans to make the argument that unemployment insurance is a bad thing. I WANT a Republica Nevada Senate to be in favor of nuclear waste at Yucca Mountain. I WANT a debate over whether the Gulf disaster shows that private industry should be deregulated.
Let's see if all those self-defined "conservatives" will actually support such a program, when push comes to shove.
Nomad....sterilize imperfections...Nomad...sterilize...sterilize...STERILIZE...
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
SkeeterVT
July 7, 2010 2:17 AM
Sharron Angle has no case. Her old Web site contains her public statements and positions on issues of interest to the public. Therefore, they are public record and cannot be copyrighted.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Early Out
July 7, 2010 7:12 AM
What makes me crazy is that the Democrats have never quite learned the standard G.O.P. routine of finding the right phrases that stick in the heads of low information voters. How about:
"Massive Coverup by Angle!!"
They don't even need to convey to the voters what Angle is covering up. Just plant the word "coverup" in their addled heads.
More suggestions:
"Angle to abolish Social Security!"
"Angle wants massages for convicts!"
You just want the dimmer voters to think to themselves (while moving their lips, one presumes), "Gee, I don't like the sound of that."
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
OhioMan
July 7, 2010 7:27 AM
Does she really think she can run away from her own opinions forever? Conservatives are just so wacky. They are happy to spew idiotic BS to "low-information voters" (i.e. stupid people on the right), then when thinking people enter the room they suddenly clam up and speak in generalities. They don't seem to realize that we are onto them.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Early Out
July 7, 2010 8:26 AM in reply to OhioMan
Sure, we're onto them. But the low information voters never catch on.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
July 7, 2010 8:26 AM
"Reid Pulls Website out of Angle Memory Hole"
Auch du lieber, Josh. There had to be a nicer way to say that.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
jward
July 7, 2010 9:09 AM
Let's not forget that Angle thinks NOBODY should ever get an abortion --not a 13-year victim of incest or anybody. Because it is all God's will and he will provide.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
nick
July 7, 2010 9:25 AM
Her problem sems to be that she spent to much time near Yucca mountain
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Don
July 7, 2010 11:47 AM
I hope she sues Reid just so she has to go on the stand and swear under oath that she said what she said, and then changed her positons statements, but obviously not her positions ... this could be the debate she wants to avoid at all costs!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
BettyO
July 7, 2010 12:04 PM
Goodby Harry! I read Angle's, then I researched all your records. You gotta go! You are just a career politician who uses the wanna believe power to influence politics... and not for the best of America or it's people, just for your pocket! Hey, wonder how much money you got and how you got it when you make only so much in salary.... uhm.... do I hear crook? YES!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
krag
July 7, 2010 12:20 PM
Conservatives would have stopped the Internet from happening. It's common knowledge that the conservative Republican party hates the National Science Foundation. It was the NSF that made the Internet happen, they had the vision to open the door to the world. http://www.livinginternet.com/i/ii_nsfnet.htm
July 1, 1956. The Steve Allen Show, New York City. "As Elvis rehearsed for an appearance on The Steve Allen Show, national media buzzed with backlash against Elvis's hip-swinging performance on Milton Berle's show just a few weeks earlier. Conservative critics called Elvis a "disciple of the devil."
Conservatives fear a free society, trying to control what people do... whether it's in Iran or the USA! Conservatives are bad for America.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Barry Champlain
July 7, 2010 12:42 PM
Just curious: did anyone catch that cross-eyed, Black Republican shill on MSNBC last night?
Talk about "feigned indignation"! My God, I've seen high school productions of "Hamlet" that were more convincing. He skipped answering whatever the question about Angle's positions were, and just kept yelling, pounding the "OUTRAGEOUS!!" talking point like ground chuck.
It's almost amusing how they strive to make low-information voters as "OUTRAGED!" as they're pretending to be, over a contrived issue which you can bet their marks don't even get. Just keep screaming that we're all "OUTRAGED!"
Imagine their actually trying to explain their feigned righteous indignation to the Dummies:
"The old website contained spaces for e-mail addresses, and anyone going to the Harry Reid site and seeing it there might be tempted to support Angle, and insert their information in the boxes, thinking it would go to the Angle campaign; but instead, the Reid campaign would steal these e-mail addresses, and..."
Gomer: "... whut?" :-)
My first thought watching this tool try to act ballistic, last night, was: this is all you've got???
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Sniffit
July 7, 2010 1:50 PM
"so, her views are 'extreme' because harry reid says so, huh?"
No, not because he says so, but rather because they simply are. She's off the fucking reservation. Moreover, she has acted in a manner that implicitly acknowledges that SHE ACTUALLY RECOGNIZES THAT HER BELIEFS AND POLICY POSITIONS ARE EXTREME.
She took down the "primary election" site and replaced it with a toned-down "general election" site precisely becuase she and her handlers know that (a) to get the GOP nomination, she had to act like a batshit crazy right-wing nutjob Teatard and (b) to win the general election, she can't just rely on the GOPer base and Glush Limbeck tinfoil-hat-wearing robot army...she needs to win over at least some of the independents, the ones who gravitate towards the right of center, etc., so she couldn't come out with both guns a-blazin', firing off nonsense and nutjobbery, lest she turn off those independents.
Furthermore, her history is repleat with party-hopping and other abject flip-floppery, which supports the above analysi sbecause it shows she's more than willing to espouse political positions and utter partisan rhetoric BASED ON WHAT IS CONVENIENT to her campaigning and power grabs.
Lastly, SHE DOTH PROTEST TOO MUCH. You can't put the shit back in the dog. She shit it, so she should own it. Using threats of legal action in an attempt to force Reid's campaign to stop quoting THINGS SHE UNDENIABLY SAID and citing her SELF-PUBLISHED positions on hot-button contemporary issues reveals, without a scintilla of doubt, that she knows damn well that those quotes and positions mark her as an extremist and that she has to hide them and soften them in order to make her candidacy more palatable to the general electorate.
Get a life. Her behavior only confirms that she's an extremist, an opportunist and a fucking moron.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
readytoblowagasket
July 7, 2010 2:17 PM
Reposting a website is not copyright "infringement," so good luck with that threat!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
shle896
July 7, 2010 3:24 PM
The Reid camp can rest assured that Sharron Angle will destroy herself. She's mean-spirited and completely ignorant, so no real need to worry, though she is highly entertaining.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
daveosociologist
July 7, 2010 6:19 PM
So does she get to sue the way back machine too?
http://web.archive.org/web/*/http://www.sharronangle.com/
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Stephen
July 17, 2010 7:13 PM
Did any one actually READ the old web site information??
Here is her social security statement:
"Social Security and its attendant Medicare are broken and bankrupt systems because we, as voting citizens, have allowed congress to transform these systems from insurance programs to and entitlement programs. The government must continue to keep its contract with seniors, who entered into the system on good faith and now are depending on that contract. (Pat Boone, a champion for seniors and the spokesman for 60's Plus, has endorsed Sharon Angle's candidacy.)
Free market alternatives, which offer retirement choices to employees and employers, must be developed and offered to those still in their wage earning years, as the Social Security system is transitioned out. Young workers must be encouraged to investigate personal retirement account options."
Sharon goes on to explain a health care system like the one congress gives itself OR something less if that is what YOU want. You are not forced into anything!!!
Interesting that she is proposing that the GOVERNMENT's retirement pension program actually be extended to EVERYONE! Imagine - 7.5% of your earnings plus 7.5% employer match! PLUS a 401k match!!! Thats over 21% (more if you choose to max out your 401k). Thats as good as being a government employee!!! YOU GET TO KEEP IT ALL!!! Instead of the government over spending it all on earmarks and token pork to get reelected and appease the special interest groups!!!
Boy... the career politicians sure don't want that. They would no longer be able to spend the billions of Social Security with holdings. My goodness... they would have to give up their pin money!!!
PLEASE give me those government perks!!!!!
The liberal LIES and SPIN on this topic are the sick Career Politicians' ways of diverting the voters from what is actually best for the people and the country!!!!
The Career politicians real interests are to get reelected and gain more political power by taxing and over spending.
I will be voting for the scoundrels to find a real cereer.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?