« And The Stupid Will Inherit A Message ... | Main | And Just Because I'm Feeling Particularly Pissy At The Moment »

April 26, 2006

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d83451d65569e200d834bb582e69e2

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Gettin' Awfully Short Tempered:

Comments

AKA wacko lib

Are you listening to this, "Democatic establishment"? PAY ATTENTION.

moorcat

As I have said many times, I have been throughly unimpressed with Morrison. I have no idea why he decided not to show for the Missoula debate but it will not help him with the Democratic voters. I was pretty put off by Morrison when he wouldn't answer any of my emails. Even Conman Burns will answer most questions if you ask.

Unfortunately, I think you are probably right about the primary results. Unless something radically changes between now and the Primary (like charges actually being filed against either Burns or Morrison), it wouldn't surprise me at all to see Republicans voting on the Democratic Primary ticket to put Morrison out front. I am somewhat surprised that you didn't mention the ethics questions about his handling of the Taske case. That, to me, seems a lot more important than Morrison's affair. You can be guarenteed that the Republicans will make a lot of use of it. Notice that they haven't yet?

I don't want to see a large scale battle between Democratic Candidates but at this point, it almost seems inevitable. Morrison would do his party a great deal of good by withdrawing. If he can overcome his negative press in two years, he could always run against Baucus.

Moorcat

moorcat

So here is a question I have been meaning to ask but keep forgetting. You (Wulfgar) may know. What happens if a candidate withdraws (either voluntarily or is forced to) after the primary? What about after the election?

I ask this because both Burns and Morrison have some very serious legal questions to answer....

Moorcat

Wulfgar

By my reading, if a candidate withdraws having been nominated by the party, or is forced, from the primary then the seat is considered uncontested. That would be why Burns hired a lawyer now, to my thinking.

moorcat

Now that would truly suck....

Moorcat

Matt Singer

It depends when the candidate leaves. If it's early enough, the party apparatus picks a replacement. If it's late enough, the party is forced to stick with the name on the ballot.

Pogie

I can't help but wonder why it is that Democrats keep falling for the illusion of electability. Issues, honesty, directness. That's all I want from a candidate.

I'm sure not seeing any of those from the Morrison campaign.

Mark

Max Jr.

moorcat

Max Jr... I have seen this title given to Morrison a number of times and I am wondering why. Max Baucus was a GREAT Senator for Montana. He was the first Montana Senator I voted for. Back in the day, he was ideological, hard working and had an intuitive understanding of what MONTANA needed in representation. He was the product of the Melcher/Mansfield/Metcalf era and they accomplished great things for Montana.

Today I see Baucus as simply getting tired. He has been "fighting the good fight" for decades. As much as I REALLY like Baucus for what he has done for Montana, there comes a time when the torch has to be passed to new blood.

I currently see Morrison as more of a "Slick Willy" politician. He is photogenic, slick toungued and polished but he uses a lot of words to say very little. His ethics are questionable at this point and I don't see him as a good representative for Montana.

So where does the Max Jr. come from?

Moorcat

fred

You should do happy hour with some liberals. Drinking Liberally.

Email them and start a Drinking Liberally!

Wulfgar

I would stop short of calling Max a "great" Senator for Montana. He has been, always, a political animal. He's done some really good things for the state, but also some really bad things, most egregious among them being quiet when he should have used the position to speak out. I wouldn't call John Melcher a great Senator, but at least he did that much. Max ... not so much.

The things I admire about Max are the things I know for certain: he idolizes Mike Mansfield, but cannot live up to that lofty legacy. Unlike Burns, he actually gives a shit about Montana, as opportunity allows. He often takes stances that favor the majority Montana opinion, which is sometimes contrary to the role of elected representation for anyone who believes in ideals or values beyond the will of the mob. Lately, it seems for all the world that he protects his position above all things.

Calling John Morrison "Max Jr." is an insult, but not so much to Max as it is to John. Morrison embodies the worst traits of our senior Senator. I will agree with you this much; as much as Max pisses me off right now (Max, why can't I quit you?) Morrison appears hardly worthy to carry his briefcase.

Wulfgar

fred, we were doing DL in Boeman for a brief time, but then I got busy and dropped the ball. Hopefully this summer we can revive the practice, though I'm not likely the most favored son in the area at this point.

Fogey

How about someone talk Paul Richards into stepping out of the race in favor of Tester, with the deal that we all will back him for a primary run against Max in 2008?

Doesn't matter if he can win against Max, but I for one am sick of holding my nose and voting for the bastard just to keep some republican from winning. Any more, if it wasn't for the D after his name, you wouldn't know Max even sat on the left side of the aisle...

Wulfgar

Fogey, from your fingers to God's ears ...

The comments to this entry are closed.

My Photo

Read This!

Friends like Family

Blog powered by Typepad