Barney Frank is going to lose the MA 4th

[llepard]

I just had breakfast with Sean Bielat, the Repbulican challenger to Barney Frank in the Mass. 4th District.

You heard it here first. Barney is going to lose.

Internal polling shows Bielat is within 10 points of Frank and no one even knows who Bielat is yet. Bielat polls 70/30 over Frank among independents. He is a very good candidate for this seat. www.seanbielat.org

Bielat is 35 years old and very smart. He "gets it". He is not perfect in terms of being a Ron Paul candidate, but he is close. Very close. He would be a huge improvement over Barney. I have supported him.

LL

[jmhudak17]

Anyone know how he's doing overall in polls? This would be awesome if we could knock out Frank.

[specsaregood]

Bielat is 35 years old and very smart. He "gets it". He is not perfect in terms of being a Ron Paul candidate, but he is close. Very close. He would be a huge improvement over Barney. I have supported him.

LL

Please explain how he "gets it". All I know is that he was a democrat that changed to a republican to run against Barney.

[Original_Intent]

Good to see you LL. I just saw you mentioned in another thread on silver miners stock, and was wondering if you still hung around these forums.

[llepard]

Please explain how he "gets it". All I know is that he was a democrat that changed to a republican to run against Barney.

1. Knows the whole system is corrupt.
2. Thinks there is enormous pay to play going on.
3. Believes in reduced govt.
4. Believes in balancing budget.
5. Is a businessman.
6. Believes in border enforcement.
7. Believes wars should be voted on in Congress.
8. Believes there is enormous fat in the defense budget and it must be cut.
9. Knows that entitlements must be reined in/restructured/reduced.

On social issues he is a moderate/liberal.

[sailingaway]

So if the GOP gets the House would Ron get to be chair of the subcommittee on monetary policy this time? Last time they disbanded the committee until they could get someone more senior on it to be chair.

Frank at least let HR 1207 come to a hearing. Are we CERTAIN we'll take the House? Because another Dem might NOT let it come forward.

[LukeP]

I hate Frank so much, this would truly make my day (year).

[llepard]

I hate Frank so much, this would truly make my day (year).

Me too. I had a lot of correspondence going with Frank. When I demanded he resign he stopped responding to my letters.

LL

[specsaregood]

1. Knows the whole system is corrupt.
2. Thinks there is enormous pay to play going on.
3. Believes in reduced govt.
4. Believes in balancing budget.
5. Is a businessman.
6. Believes in border enforcement.
7. Believes wars should be voted on in Congress.
8. Believes there is enormous fat in the defense budget and it must be cut.
9. Knows that entitlements must be reined in/restructured/reduced.

On social issues he is a moderate/liberal.

Thanks, so he isn't a democrat that believes big government can be good, that it just needs to be cleaned up?

[Johnnybags]

simple ads that were cooked up by us instead of the idiotic agencies they'd all win. To beat Barney a few ads with the moron talking up FNM and FRE and bickering with his constituents while calling him a failed "progressive" is all you need. I'd contrbute to a properly designed ad happily to rid Mass of Frank. Just the sound of his voice grates on peoples nerves.

[llepard]

Thanks, so he isn't a democrat that believes big government can be good, that it just needs to be cleaned up?

No. He believes in limited government. He believes we must downsize.

Is he where we all are? Probably not, but between him and Barney Frank it is a "no brainer".

[Anti Federalist]

No. He believes in limited government. He believes we must downsize.

Is he where we all are? Probably not, but between him and Barney Frank it is a "no brainer".

Beezelbub might be an improvement over Fwank. ;)

Good to hear from you again Larry.

[llepard]

Beezelbub might be an improvement over Fwank. ;)



Fair point. The interesting thing here is that I think Frank loses. Hallelujah!

[rich34]

Fair point. The interesting thing here is that I think Frank loses. Hallelujah!

Does that mean if the republicans retake control of the house that Ron becomes chairman on that committee? I know probably not we couldn't get that lucky..

[rich34]

simple ads that were cooked up by us instead of the idiotic agencies they'd all win. To beat Barney a few ads with the moron talking up FNM and FRE and bickering with his constituents while calling him a failed "progressive" is all you need. I'd contrbute to a properly designed ad happily to rid Mass of Frank. Just the sound of his voice grates on peoples nerves.

I agree.

[tjeffersonsghost]

If Frank loses I will streak up and down the street, Ill post pics too :-)

[anaconda]

I just had breakfast with Sean Bielat, the Repbulican challenger to Barney Frank in the Mass. 4th District.

You heard it here first. Barney is going to lose.

Internal polling shows Bielat is within 10 points of Frank and no one even knows who Bielat is yet. Bielat polls 70/30 over Frank among independents. He is a very good candidate for this seat. www.seanbielat.org

Bielat is 35 years old and very smart. He "gets it". He is not perfect in terms of being a Ron Paul candidate, but he is close. Very close. He would be a huge improvement over Barney. I have supported him.

LL

What's the plan to close 10 points in 26 days? Or, are you implying that the independents weren't counted in the particular poll?

[erowe1]

I just had breakfast with Sean Bielat, the Repbulican challenger to Barney Frank in the Mass. 4th District.

You heard it here first. Barney is going to lose.

Internal polling shows Bielat is within 10 points of Frank and no one even knows who Bielat is yet. Bielat polls 70/30 over Frank among independents. He is a very good candidate for this seat. www.seanbielat.org

Bielat is 35 years old and very smart. He "gets it". He is not perfect in terms of being a Ron Paul candidate, but he is close. Very close. He would be a huge improvement over Barney. I have supported him.

LL

If nobody knows who he is less than 4 weeks before the election, and he's 10 points behind in his own internal poll, then what makes you so sure he'll win? Those are both indications of the opposite.

I do think some Republicans will win after being down in the polls. Maybe he's one of them. But it seems like wishful thinking by a supporter more than anything.

[llepard]

What's the plan to close 10 points in 26 days? Or, are you implying that the independents weren't counted in the particular poll?

The money is flowing in. People nationwide hate Barney and Sean has gotten nationwide recognition. He will raise more money than Frank.

With more money Sean runs the ads talking about Barney and FNM/FRE.

All people get this issue. A gay massachusetts group has endorsed Sean. They think he is better on the economy. Blue collar guys know about the GFC and think Barney played a key role. Barney is in deep shit.

Go look at the video advertisement at www.seanbielat.org

They will get tougher as time goes by.

The thinking up here is that Barney had a safe seat. He has run unopposed since 1982. He has no campaign staff or experience.

No body even knows Sean yet. When people hear that they can beat Frank they say, where do I sign up.

LL

[llepard]

If nobody knows who he is less than 4 weeks before the election, and he's 10 points behind in his own internal poll, then what makes you so sure he'll win? Those are both indications of the opposite.

I do think some Republicans will win after being down in the polls. Maybe he's one of them. But it seems like wishful thinking by a supporter more than anything.

Scott Brown was down by 20 points at the same point in time.

Barney Frank brought in Bill Clinton to campaign for him. It backfired. We are hoping he brings Barack.

People are pissed. This is not just any election year. You watch. Congressman Bielat.

I am more worried about the Govenors race where a great guy Charlie Baker is running against Duval Patrick. I think Sean has better odds than Charlie.

[llepard]

What's the plan to close 10 points in 26 days? Or, are you implying that the independents weren't counted in the particular poll?

Boy this is a skeptical crew. Almost makes me not want to bother to post here.

No, independents were included, which if you had read my original post you would know.

I feel thankful that I have so many geniuses here to educate me. NOT.

LL

[wormyguy]

I'd love to be optimistic, but I'm waiting for some independent polling before passing judgment on this race.

[erowe1]

Here are some things that stand out to me from items under the "Views" tab on Bielat's website:
http://seanbielat.org/

On economic growth and job creation:

Basic economic theory shows that government spending can, if targeted correctly, provide some positive economic outcomes.

On strong national defense:

The period of American military pre-eminence has seen fewer major conflicts than any other period since the rise of nation-states. U.S. military strength improves global stability

The recent Quadrennial Defense Review suggests that the U.S. should move away from its decades-old policy of being prepared to simultaneously fight two major wars. Many people believe that we should focus on non-state actors (i.e., terrorists, jihadists, etc.) rather than nation-states. I believe that we can, and must, do both.

Nature abhors a vacuum. Currently, the U.S. military fills a vital geopolitical vacuum; the European Union and Russia are simply unable to do so. On the other hand, China is investing in massive military growth and is predicted by mid-century to have an economy several times the size of our own. Should the U.S. really reduce the deterrent power of its current military capability?

On the other hand, he also says:

Article I of the Constitution gives Congress the exclusive right to declare war. Despite major conflicts in Korea, Vietnam, Afghanistan, and Iraq, the U.S. has not fought in a declared war since World War II. Our founding fathers wisely gave the power to declare war to the representatives of the people; if the people do not believe that a conflict is in their national interest, then it is not. We should adhere to the Constitution and only fight in conflicts that receive a majority vote in Congress through a Declaration of War. The federal government’s chief role is to protect her people and the process for doing so is clearly articulated in the Constitution.

On energy and environment:

Development of alternative energy is a must for our national security, for long-term economic growth, and for addressing certain environmental issues. Although untapped energy resources exist and should be explored, there is no reason to delay simultaneous investment in alternative sources of energy.

Government should not pick winners and losers among competing technologies, but government can play an important role in spurring the development of new technologies, just as it did with the space program.

On Israel (and it's worth noting that he has 7 section on his website devoted to his views, and one of those is devoted entirely to "Israel," and that one is by far the longest one):

we must recognize and support our close allies who share and support those goals. As the only functioning democracy in the Middle East and one whose experience with terrorism has been even more extensive than ours, Israel is one such natural ally.

I will support any democracy that fights the war on terror with us [so much for that bit above about Congress declaring wars]. And I will firmly support Israel in its struggle for peace, security, and an end to the threats it has known since its inception.

I applaud the recent signing of the Comprehensive Iran Sanctions, Accountability, and Divestment Act of 2009.

The United States must always respond without hesitation to protect its own interests, and thus the security of Israel and our allies in the entire Middle East region. If elected, I would affirmatively support several proposals, including the Iran Refined Petroleum Sanctions Act of 2009, which enhances the President's authority to sanction entities that export refined petroleum products to Iran. I would also press for broader and more impactful sanctions as well as the prioritization of Iran as an issue demanding an immediate and credible response. I also would work to restore funding for the Iran Human Rights Documentation Center (IHRDC).

I support the ten year memorandum of understanding between the United States and Israel and the annual appropriations legislation which will provide $30 billion in military aid to Israel through 2017.

It is the right of the people of Israel to work to control their own destiny and to live in peace. In Congress, I will encourage public alliances between Israel and other countries aiming to counter the Iranian threat. Additionally, I will use the power of my office to persuade Israel's neighbors to grant their own citizens the democratic freedoms and individual liberties similar to the citizens of Israel.

Rather than coddling those who support terror and making excuses for their actions, it is high time that the United States holds the Palestinians to standards of civilized behavior that are appropriate to a people seeking to join the community of nations in their own state.

He appears to be someone who speaks out both sides of his mouth on the concepts of limited government and the Constitution. He also appears to be more likely than Barney Frank to help us get into a war with Iran.

[brandon]

Am I the only one that doesn't have a big problem with Frank? He actively supports legalizing marijuana and gambling, equal rights for gays, and drastic cuts to military spending. I have no vendetta against him.

Why would you guys support some warmonger over an anti-war congressman?

[wormyguy]

He opposes the Iraq War and the Afghanistan surge, and supports drug legalization (http://www.southcoasttoday.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=20107250332).

The reason why he has an entire section devoted to Israel on his site is because MA-04 is one of the most heavily Jewish districts in the country and he probably would need at least 30% of the Jewish vote to win.

[anaconda]

Boy this is a skeptical crew. Almost makes me not want to bother to post here.

No, independents were included, which if you had read my original post you would know.

I feel thankful that I have so many geniuses here to educate me. NOT.

LL

This is very exciting and I'm glad you posted this information, Larry.

I will try to make a donation to Bielat.

Thank you always for your amazing and generous support of the Revolution.

[erowe1]

He opposes the Iraq War and the Afghanistan surge, and supports drug legalization (http://www.southcoasttoday.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=20107250332).

The reason why he has an entire section devoted to Israel on his site is because MA-04 is one of the most heavily Jewish districts in the country and he probably would need at least 30% of the Jewish vote to win.

It's not just that he has the section, it's what he has in it.

Edit: His positions on Iraq and the Afghanistan surge are encouraging.

[brandon]

Frank speaking on drug legalization:

"In a free society a large degree of human activity is none of the government's business. We should make criminal what's going to hurt other people and other than that we should leave it to people to make their own choices."

[brandon]

Boy this is a skeptical crew. Almost makes me not want to bother to post here.


Well what do you expect when you make a seemingly far fetched statement with Nostradamus-like certainty on an internet forum?

[wormyguy]

It's not just that he has the section, it's what he has in it.

Once again, you don't understand the district. In the eyes of many Jewish voters in the district, Irish Catholic + has made dovish statements = anti-Semitic. If he does not have a big, long, over-the-top section on Israel on his website, he can't be elected congressman from MA-04.

[Throwback280s]

Sounds like a great way to clean house and start afresh with a candidate open to liberty ideas and not bought by the establishment.

BTW Larry, long time no see. How are things going?

[llepard]

Well what do you expect when you make a seemingly far fetched statement with Nostradamus-like certainty on an internet forum?

A little respect. I think I deserve that.

You think the statement is "far fetched"? How much would you like to wager?

LL

[erowe1]

Once again, you don't understand the district. In the eyes of many Jewish voters in the district, Irish Catholic + has made dovish statements = anti-Semitic. If he does not have a big, long, over-the-top section on Israel on his website, he can't be elected congressman from MA-04.

Somehow Barney Frank has managed well enough there while still taking a more moderate stance on Iran than most others in Congress (though admittedly, hardly a noninterventionist one).

Edit: Granted, that may be because he's Jewish. But from the standpoint of who looks better policy-wise on the issues Bielat covers in the Israel section of his website, it's still the case that Frank does.

[llepard]

Am I the only one that doesn't have a big problem with Frank? He actively supports legalizing marijuana and gambling, equal rights for gays, and drastic cuts to military spending. I have no vendetta against him.

Why would you guys support some warmonger over an anti-war congressman?

Sean Bielat is not a warmonger.

Barney is pushing for a second jet engine on the strike fighter since the engine will be built in Massachusetts. He is not as pure anti war as you think.

Barney is so deep in the pockets of the banks and union interests that he cannot see straight. Sean may fail us, but at least he comes to the party clean.

You are out of your league. Shut up.

[llepard]

He opposes the Iraq War and the Afghanistan surge, and supports drug legalization (http://www.southcoasttoday.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=20107250332).

The reason why he has an entire section devoted to Israel on his site is because MA-04 is one of the most heavily Jewish districts in the country and he probably would need at least 30% of the Jewish vote to win.

Once again, you don't understand the district. In the eyes of many Jewish voters in the district, Irish Catholic + has made dovish statements = anti-Semitic. If he does not have a big, long, over-the-top section on Israel on his website, he can't be elected congressman from MA-04.



ding ding ding ding.......

Folks we have a winner.

LL

[angelatc]

RS McCain (The Other McCain) has been pushing him so hard I figured he must be a total war monger. Thanks for the heads up.

[erowe1]

You are out of your league. Shut up.

To be fair, Mr. Lepard, with the rhetorical mastery you demonstrate in comebacks such as this one, who could possibly ever be in your league?

[angelatc]

To be fair, Mr. Lepard, with the rhetorical mastery you demonstrate in comebacks such as this one, who could possibly ever be in your league?

Nice way to rebut all the actual points LL made, and he didn't even touch on Frank's FNMA problems, either.

[llepard]

To be fair, Mr. Lepard, with the rhetorical mastery you demonstrate in comebacks such as this one, who could possibly ever be in your league?

I am not sure, but it certainly is not you or Brandon. This used to be a forum that respected people who were on the team. I guess the rules have changed....

A pity.

LL

[Ekrub]

Thanks for the heads up llepard, I'll try and donate soon.

And Barney Frank may be anti-war, but he is also a huge socialist/corporatist/whatever. Ousting him wouldn't be as big of a win as ousting Pelosi, but it would be a statement.

On top of that I can't stand his voice. If I have to hear: "Vwood, thhe distweenguished gemtemam" one more time.... :p


My Priorities Economic Growth and Job Creation | Basic economic theory shows that government spending can, if targeted correctly, provide some positive economic outcomes. Unfortunately, it is beyond the powers of economists to forecast how much spending is too much. Stimulus spending under this administration and Congress has put politics over policy, and the result has been handouts to special interests, inefficient spending, and far too much debt.

I'm okay with him here. He does say that government spending can provide some positive outcomes, which isn't entirely untrue. (in the short term)


Deficit Reduction | The ever-growing deficit is simply unsustainable. The non-partisan Congressional Budget Office estimates that net interest on the national debt will soon rise to 14% of the total federal budget. The effect of these deficits is a debt load approaching 90% of the Gross Domestic Product. At this point, the debt load is $30,400 per person. We are putting our nation at risk through reckless spending and irresponsible policy.

+1


A Strong National Defense | Ronald Reagan successfully argued that American military might keeps the peace. His “peace through strength” approach reshaped the geo-political landscape for the better.

Ron Paul focuses a lot on Reagan's handling of the Cold War. I know a lot of people here are against standing armies, but there is some truth in "Peace through Strength." As long as we are actually practicing peace, and not occupying foreign countries.


Focus on the Constitution | The United States is a country founded a set of ideas--ideas enshrined in our Constitution. Our public officials and military personnel take an oath to uphold and defend the Constitution, but too many politicians in DC seem to have forgotten the oath that they took and the responsibilities entailed in that oath.

+1

Other Important Issues



An Intelligent 21st-Century Tax Policy | A free and safe society depends on tax revenues. We fund the military, build roads and bridges, equip police forces and educate our children with tax dollars. Taxes support the infrastructure that enables economic growth and a free and safe society. But we must always strive to keep taxes to a minimum, operate an efficient government, and focus on private-sector economic growth to generate revenues that sustain our way of life.

Good here. I think we can't forget that it is hard to be elected as a straight free-market guy. This sounds a lot better than Barney Frank.


Border Security and Immigration | We can’t begin to have a serious discussion about immigration reform until the Federal government first fulfills its duty to secure our borders and ports.

Don't know how I completely feel about this one... Though many people would agree that if we end minimum wage laws, the war on drugs, and welfare/social security, immigrants wouldn't be the scapegoats.


Citizen Legislators | Representatives who spend decades in Congress become detached from the problems of ordinary people and the challenges of the “real” economy and the business world. They begin to feel entitled to their positions and to believe that they can legislate or regulate a solution to every problem. We need a return to citizen legislators instead of career politicians.

Disagree, but I get where he is coming from.


Second Amendment | The right for ordinary citizens to bear arms and protect themselves and their families has been upheld for over two centuries. I support this right.

+1


Cap and Trade | Cap and Trade is simply another power grab by this administration and cannot be implemented on the broad scale currently proposed.

+1


Rail Service Expansion | Building a transportation infrastructure to move citizens and workers in and out of our cities and towns is an area that is I believe is properly in the scope of government.

Disagree


Real Health Care Solutions | The massive health care bill recently signed by the President cannot and will not solve our health care issues.

+1


Fishing Regulations and the Southcoast Economy | Draconian regulations on the fishing industry by federal agencies put an unfair burden on hard-working fisherman and severely threaten the Southcoast’s main industry and our overall economy.

Don't know much about the problem, but deregulation is good by me.


Relations with Israel | Israel faces unique threats and deserves the support of Western nations that value stable democracy and a growing economy in the Middle East.

I would disagree, but as was pointed out, he comes from a heavily Jewish district.


Don’t Ask Don’t Tell | The military should be a tool for security policy, not a petri dish for social policy. Changes to military policy should be based on an assessment of their impact on military effectiveness and should only be implemented after a thorough investigation of that impact. We should always prioritize military effectiveness over political correctness.

good


Marriage | I have a traditional understanding of marriage. I believe that any efforts to change the way marriage has been legally defined should be subject to either a legislative or referendum process. I also believe that marriage should remain a state issue.

Or not an issue for a government at all, but at least he concedes that the state should be making those laws.

Overall I can't see how you could prefer Barney Frank over this guy.

[-C-]

I just had breakfast with Sean Bielat, the Repbulican challenger to Barney Frank in the Mass. 4th District.

You heard it here first. Barney is going to lose.

Internal polling shows Bielat is within 10 points of Frank and no one even knows who Bielat is yet. Bielat polls 70/30 over Frank among independents. He is a very good candidate for this seat. www.seanbielat.org

Bielat is 35 years old and very smart. He "gets it". He is not perfect in terms of being a Ron Paul candidate, but he is close. Very close. He would be a huge improvement over Barney. I have supported him.

LL

You can thank Rachel Brown for wrecking the democratic base of support for the guy, during their primary. FYI, a lot of people know hes going to lose...and I didn't hear it from here first.

[llepard]

RS McCain (The Other McCain) has been pushing him so hard I figured he must be a total war monger. Thanks for the heads up.

I don't think he likes McCain all that much. He hates Palin, and as much as said so at Breakfast. Politics makes strange bedfellows. I guess he is not going to give John's money back to him, but an endorsement from McCain does not make him a war monger, de facto or de jure. He believes in taking care of Americans first. He is a Marine. He does believe in a strong America. But, he also says we can accomplish the goal for a lot less. He pointed out that there are over 700,000 people working in non combat defense roles in the government. He thinks that is crazy.

[Rocco]

Mr Lepard, with all due respect and the acknowledgement of how much you have contributed to the Ron Paul Revolution, you're coming off as a little arrogant here. I know you are obviously very well informed and I trust your knowledge, but I would really like to see some things answered before supporting a candidate (whether it is monetarily or by phone banking or otherwise). There are some legitimate questions being asked here (like the prediction of a Frank loss despite him being up 10 and having name recognition) that you seem to be dismissing. This is an important point because you do have influence in the Ron Paul community, and many may spring to donate to the guy based on your endorsement. I think it's important for us to know the specifics of the questions that have been posed, because if we don't have those then we cannot make an informed decision.

[llepard]

FYI, a lot of people know hes going to lose...and I didn't hear it from here first.

Tell Brandon, she thinks it is a "far fetched statement".

Can anyone on this forum respond to one of my posts without insulting me??? Is it possible???

A pox on all your houses.

LL

[klamath]

I would like to see BF go just on what he did to audit the fed. The guy is a sneaky SOB.
If barney Frank was REALLY so anti war he could shut it down by bottling up funding in his commitee.

[llepard]

Mr Lepard, with all due respect and the acknowledgement of how much you have contributed to the Ron Paul Revolution, you're coming off as a little arrogant here. I know you are obviously very well informed and I trust your knowledge, but I would really like to see some things answered before supporting a candidate (whether it is monetarily or by phone banking or otherwise). There are some legitimate questions being asked here (like the prediction of a Frank loss despite him being up 10 and having name recognition) that you seem to be dismissing. This is an important point because you do have influence in the Ron Paul community, and many may spring to donate to the guy based on your endorsement. I think it's important for us to know the specifics of the questions that have been posed, because if we don't have those then we cannot make an informed decision.

I have no problem with any of the substantial questions and factual challenges. I have not asked you to support the candidate. Do whatever you want. I made a statement that I thought would be interesting and newsworthy and I got criticized, attacked and second guessed. If this is the reaction why should I bother to post here? Answer? I shouldn't.

I do not mean to be arrogant. But, I demand civillity. I am taking my time to try to pass along information. If I am not treated civily then why bother.

Have I insulted you?? If the answer is no, then I ask, why insult me?

LL

[MRoCkEd]

Thanks Larry! Looks good.

[erowe1]

I am not sure, but it certainly is not you or Brandon. This used to be a forum that respected people who were on the team. I guess the rules have changed....

A pity.

LL

Who, besides you, has said anything disrespectful in this thread?

[teacherone]

thanks for the heads up larry.

i will do my research and decide if he's worth promoting.

[klamath]

I have no problem with any of the challenges. I have not asked you to support the candidate. Do whatever you want. I made a statement that I thought would be interesting and newsworthy and I got criticized, attacked and second guessed. If this is the reaction why should I bother to post here? Answer? I shouldn't.

I do not mean to be arrogant. But, I demand civillity. I am taking my time to try to pass along information. If I am not treated civily then why bother.

LL

Unfortunately this place spends more time promoting anarchy and bashing the constitution than it did in the old days. I am surprised you haven't been called a brainwashed statist yet:D You have my respect.

[llepard]

Who, besides you, has said anything disrespectful in this thread?

"But it seems like wishful thinking by a supporter more than anything."

For starters.

I live and die by my analysis and my integrity. You might as well have called me a liar. I do not engage in wishful thinking. If my thinking is flawed it costs me huge amounts of money. Claiming that I am being intellectually dishonest is as big an insult as you can give me.

Very disrespectful in my book. But i am 52 years old and am old fashioned.

LL

[college4life]

Larry I do think you need to have thicker skin and not be so defensive.

I, for one, have a hard time supporting someone who promotes Israel to such an extent and believes the government can create economic prosperity.

I think it is extremely unlikely this guy will win but in no way is this an insult on you or anyone else.

I'm a huge Schiff fan and I thought he had next to no chance of winning in CT. Does this make me suddenly anti-schiff?

[Austrian Econ Disciple]

He is your typical conservative, if that is your thing then by all means go for it. (Just read his 'National Security' page)

[Stary Hickory]

Will he vote to repeal Obamacare? Considering this is one monster that can be kneecapped before it gets going, it's important to know.

[Stary Hickory]

Am I the only one that doesn't have a big problem with Frank? He actively supports legalizing marijuana and gambling, equal rights for gays, and drastic cuts to military spending. I have no vendetta against him.

Why would you guys support some warmonger over an anti-war congressman?

Hoe voted and fought FOR Obamacare, protected and enabled Fannie mae and Freddie mac. He supports the welfare state and is always ready to tax and rob the people a little more. I see you don't care about these issues or else you would at the very least have a problem with him in some regards.

[Austrian Econ Disciple]

Hoe voted and fought FOR Obamacare, protected and enabled Fannie mae and Freddie mac. He supports the welfare state and is always ready to tax and rob the people a little more. I see you don't care about these issues or else you would at the very least have a problem with him in some regards.

It is the age old question -- who takes more of your liberty: The conservative or the liberal. The answer, they both take equal parts. It then becomes a value judgment to each individual as to how important each of their liberties are. Personally, I place a higher value on those who are anti-war, just because in war the State not only swells by revoking any civil liberties you might have had, it also destroys any economic liberties you had also (Not to mention costing more than Welfare). That said, I stay out of this muck-racking of choosing which liberties you would rather have stolen. I'd rather not have any.

[college4life]

Welfare has cost much more than Wars.

Add up Medicare and Medicaid alone compared to whatever wars you rail against.

[Stary Hickory]

It is the age old question -- who takes more of your liberty: The conservative or the liberal. The answer, they both take equal parts. It then becomes a value judgment to each individual as to how important each of their liberties are. Personally, I place a higher value on those who are anti-war, just because in war the State not only swells by revoking any civil liberties you might have had, it also destroys any economic liberties you had also (Not to mention costing more than Welfare). That said, I stay out of this muck-racking of choosing which liberties you would rather have stolen. I'd rather not have any.

Wars end, they always do. Welfare lives forever and turns into class warfare and the politics of envy. Progressives/Leftists have started just as many wars as the right has. And what really goads me is that the wars are ending, the Neocons have been reigned in and yet the progressive/liberal agenda still wages a very hot and violent war against our freedoms and some people here could care less.

For the sake of stopping a socialist takeover of healthcare all the Dems should be gone. Health care can be stopped. The moment I see that this movement is no longer fighting against domestic violence from government is the time I leave. Remember the original liberty movement was coopted not by the right but by the left.

I see people proclaim here downright statist views. This is equally unacceptable as someone who supports neocon views. Yet there is no moderation of these people. And frankly I am growing tired of it. Barney Frank is one of the very worst liberal politicians in DC, it is akin to supporting a hardcore Neocon, yet people here do this.

The hypocrisy grows and it is noticeable. I am starting to think the Ron Paul movement might as well be something else. I don't think it will stay libertarian very long. I have an equal desire to end the wars and reign in the welfare state. The wars are going to end, I imagine before Obama runs for reelection they will be ended or pretty much run down. What is not ending at all but what is in serious danger of spiralling out of control is the welfare state. 2012 will mark a serious chance to end Obamacare before it destroys our system. I do get tired of people yawning and not giving a damn. It is unacceptable to be wishy washy on the welfare state as it is on the wars in the middle east.

[erowe1]

"But it seems like wishful thinking by a supporter more than anything."

For starters.

I live and die by my analysis and my integrity. You might as well have called me a liar. I do not engage in wishful thinking. If my thinking is flawed it costs me huge amounts of money. Claiming that I am being intellectually dishonest is as big an insult as you can give me.

Very disrespectful in my book. But i am 52 years old and am old fashioned.

LL

If getting an accusation of intellectual dishonesty that's as bad as calling you a liar out of someone saying that something seems like wishful thinking is a result of the same analysis and integrity that led you to believe that being 10 points down and being unknown by the electorate are signs that portend a Bielat victory, then you've not allayed anyone's skepticism here.

No offense.

[Austrian Econ Disciple]

Welfare has cost much more than Wars.

Add up Medicare and Medicaid alone compared to whatever wars you rail against.

If you read What is Seen and Unseen by Bastiat it will quickly dispel this. Our defense budget is well near a trillion dollars a year, not to mention the costs of destruction in foreign lands we rebuild and the deluge of other associative costs (E.g. subsidizing foreign entities and lands). It would be something if we got some goods back, but we don't. It is literally a funneling of wealth from this country to foreign countries. This is why it is a big joke. Conservatives rail against foreign aid, but then want to keep military bases around the world...HELLO! I could go on further in-depth, but I doubt it warrants too much further inquiry (Self-evident).

Not to mention the fact that injuries sustained by combat members carry extremely large costs to society (Also, the Military has this thing called retirement which is extremely expensive).

[college4life]

AED, I know you think you are probably far more enlightened than me but look up how much we spend on Medicare/Medicaid while you are at it.

[Austrian Econ Disciple]

Wars end, they always do. Welfare lives forever and turns into class warfare and the politics of envy. Progressives/Leftists have started just as many wars as the right has. And what really goads me is that the wars are ending, the Neocons have been reigned in and yet the progressive/liberal agenda still wages a very hot and violent war against our freedoms and some people here could care less.

For the sake of stopping a socialist takeover of healthcare all the Dems should be gone. Health care can be stopped. The moment I see that this movement is no longer fighting against domestic violence from government is the time I leave. Remember the original liberty movement was coopted not by the right but by the left.

I see people proclaim here downright statist views. This is equally unacceptable as someone who supports neocon views. Yet there is no moderation of these people. And frankly I am growing tired of it. Barney Frank is one of the very worst liberal politicians in DC, it is akin to supporting a hardcore Neocon, yet people here do this.

The hypocrisy grows and it is noticeable. I am starting to think the Ron Paul movement might as well be something else. I don't think it will stay libertarian very long. I have an equal desire to end the wars and reign in the welfare state. The wars are going to end, I imagine before Obama runs for reelection they will be ended or pretty much run down. What is not ending at all but what is in serious danger of spiralling out of control is the welfare state. 2012 will mark a serious chance to end Obamacare before it destroys our system. I do get tired of people yawning and not giving a damn. It is unacceptable to be wishy washy on the welfare state as it is on the wars in the middle east.

Wars may end, but the programs created by the wars seldom do and the liberties lost rarely if ever are recovered. Moreover, you don't think injured soldiers cost money after the war? What is the VA? What about retirement?

Also, I am not defending Frank, merely observing why one would pick him as the lesser evil over Beilet. I choose neither.

[college4life]

AED, it's not like liberals end the wars. With them you get wars plus a million social programs.

You are very naive.

[Austrian Econ Disciple]

AED, it's not like liberals end the wars. With them you get wars plus a million social programs.

You are very naive.

Well Barney Frank has come together with Ron Paul to end the wars and reduce military spending, now if other members of the Congress do that....I doubt it, but nonetheless I don't see how Beilet is so much better. Again, I repeat, I don't like either one, but I am not going to bemoan one who picks certain liberties over another (Ok, actually I will :p...I just view wars as the worst of both worlds, because it is!), though I will begrudge the thought of even choosing either one.

[Stary Hickory]

Wars may end, but the programs created by the wars seldom do and the liberties lost rarely if ever are recovered. Moreover, you don't think injured soldiers cost money after the war? What is the VA? What about retirement?

The social/welfare state has been the fastest growing and remains the largest portion of our budget by far. I support neither growth of the welfare state or the warfare state, but it is obvious to see the welfare state has engulfed our budget, threatens us with insurmountable debt and obligations.

We have lost more liberties to to the progressive left than ever because of war. And what I am trying to avoid is the watershed of lost liberties as a result of Obamacare. It can be stopped. Before it ever happens, before we lose our liberties, before we are told that they very act of caring for our own bodies must be ok'd by the US government.

If you want to see what enslaves us more warfare or welfare look at the US budget. The wars will end in Iraq and Afganistan with the GOP or the Dems in power. This is going to happen. Whereas the GOP is in full neocon retreat the Dems are in fabian socialist overload. At this juncture I want the GOP in office to kill Obamacare and get fiscally more responsible people in office. There is no danger of another outbreak of war....and frankly Afghanistan and Iraq would never had happened had we not been hit my a coordinated terrorist attack that cost over 2k lives.

People here paint an inaccurate picture of Bush for one....he was not a warmonger as much as he was just an idiot. He got worked up into crisis mode after 9/11 and lost every ounce of perspective and common sense. He did this again when the financial collapse came, and he did tarp and the bailouts in a state of shock and crisis. I am no fan of Bush but I do like to see people portrayed correctly. I think he was probably one of the worst presidents of this century but he was not some bloodthirsty war lover, he was just a unprincipled moron.

[Austrian Econ Disciple]

The social/welfare state has been the fastest growing and remains the largest portion of our budget by far. I support neither growth of the welfare state or the warfare state, but it is obvious to see the welfare state has engulfed our budget, threatens us with insurmountable debt and obligations.

We have lost more liberties to to the progressive left than ever because of war. And what I am trying to avoid is the watershed of lost liberties as a result of Obamacare. It can be stopped. Before it ever happens, before we lose our liberties, before we are told that they very act of caring for our own bodies must be ok'd by the US government.

If you want to see what enslaves us more warfare or welfare look at the US budget. The wars will end in Iraq and Afganistan with the GOP or the Dems in power. This is going to happen. Whereas the GOP is in full neocon retreat the Dems are in fabian socialist overload. At this juncture I want the GOP in office to kill Obamacare and get fiscally more responsible people in office. There is no danger of another outbreak of war....and frankly Afghanistan and Iraq would never had happened had we not been hit my a coordinated terrorist attack that cost over 2k lives.

People here paint an inaccurate picture of Bush for one....he was not a warmonger as much as he was just an idiot. He got worked up into crisis mode after 9/11 and lost every ounce of perspective and common sense. He did this again when the financial collapse came, and he did tarp and the bailouts in a state of shock and crisis. I am no fan of Bush but I do like to see people portrayed correctly. I think he was probably one of the worst presidents of this century but he was not some bloodthirsty war lover, he was just a unprincipled moron.

You lost credibility when you rah-rahed for Scott Brown. I don't want to hear it. I told you then and you didn't listen. You are so blinded by Obamacare, that you put everything else on the backburner regardless if you elect someone who will steal even more liberties!

You also fail to realize that the warfare state is also the welfare state. It is the same, it merely is corporate welfare which is just as bad as po' folk welfare. At least though po' folk don't provoke every country in the world. What about the Patriot Act? What about Military Commissions Act? What about loss of 4th and 5th amendments and growing police state? That is all tied directly to war. Not to mention the huge inflation, large commitments, and clear welfare payments to foreign countries! How is this worse in your esteem?

PS: No fear of another outbreak of war? Are you kidding me? You have to be.

[llepard]

If getting an accusation of intellectual dishonesty that's as bad as calling you a liar out of someone saying that something seems like wishful thinking is a result of the same analysis and integrity that led you to believe that being 10 points down and being unknown by the electorate are signs that portend a Bielat victory, then you've not allayed anyone's skepticism here.

No offense.

None taken, asshole.

You might just want to think a moment before you blast off your all mighty dismissive comments. There are real people behind the statements on this forum. Dismissing their arguments with snotty sarcasm is not what this place used to be about.

I could give a rats ass about what you or anyone else think. I am not trying to pursuade you or anyone else. I thought I was passing along useful information and insight and a big portion of what I got back was challenges and snotty comments like the one in your quote above. Own your own behavior. I assume you are a responsible adult. Your wrote the words. To try to claim that I am misinterpreting them is a cop out on your part, kiddo.

LL

[Stary Hickory]

You lost credibility when you rah-rahed for Scott Brown. I don't want to hear it. I told you then and you didn't listen. You are so blinded by Obamacare, that you put everything else on the backburner regardless if you elect someone who will steal even more liberties!

You also fail to realize that the warfare state is also the welfare state. It is the same, it merely is corporate welfare which is just as bad as po' folk welfare. At least though po' folk don't provoke every country in the world. What about the Patriot Act? What about Military Commissions Act? What about loss of 4th and 5th amendments and growing police state? That is all tied directly to war. Not to mention the huge inflation, large commitments, and clear welfare payments to foreign countries! How is this worse in your esteem?

Ah here we go, I lost credibility? So now it is personal attacks. You were one of the few posters I had respect for here. Listen here is the deal..I rah rahed for Scott Brown? Find the post prove it or troll elsewhere. Because frankly you are being dishonest here and that is sad.

Because of Scott Brown being elected a much more far reaching and intrusive bill was scrapped. The Health Care bill was postponed, and the Dems resorted to dirty tactics to pass a bill WITHOUT going back to the senate. This is when the backroom deals and slimeball tactics that were being used got attention and has made this bill unpopular today.

And please lecture someone else about the warfare state versus the welfare state. You simply ignore the fact that the welfare state has grown more than ANY other aspect of government. More laws have been created for the domestic/progressive agenda than for the warfare state. We have completely unmanageable welfare state that has unfunded liabilities that makes the head spin

Add to this we literally outright lie to people and rob them of any means to care for themselves in their old age only to give them a big pile of fraud and broken promises when they have wasted their years and cannot support themselves. You have no perspective, if you support Dems, especially the current crop of them then I suppose we know where you stand.

It's insane really. You ask people to stop supporting neocons and warmongers when the GOP was in office. I DID this and so did many others. The Neocons are being primaried and defeated like mad, establishment GOPers are in full retreat. Yet as a hypocrite you sit on your hands while the Democrats destroy our freedoms and run this country into even greater debt. I am sorry I am having real problems respecting people like this.

I fight against neocons, many do, they are ousted..yet when a group of dems come in who are as bad or far far worse the same people screaming out against the GOP sit by and watch. It does not go unnoticed.

[erowe1]

None taken, asshole.

You might just want to think a moment before you blast off your all mighty dismissive comments. There are real people behind the statements on this forum. Dismissing their arguments with snotty sarcasm is not what this place used to be about.

I could give a rats ass about what you or anyone else think. I am not trying to pursuade you or anyone else. I thought I was passing along useful information and insight and a big portion of what I got back was challenges and snotty comments like the one in your quote above. Own your own behavior. I assume you are a responsible adult. Your wrote the words. To try to claim that I am misinterpreting them is a cop out on your part, kiddo.

LL

OK. I get the satire now. It was a little subtler up until this post.

[specsaregood]

To all of you that are getting mad/insulting/bitter with each other:

Take a step back from the computer and take a deep breath. Let insults be bygones, then try to carryon the conversation in a respectful manner.

Just saying, would hate to see anybody banned or leave the site, based on what should be a thread with good issue based discussion.

[phill4paul]

To all of you that are getting mad/insulting/bitter with each other:

Take a step back from the computer and take a deep breath. Let insults be bygones, then try to carryon the conversation in a respectful manner.

Just saying, would hate to see anybody banned or leave the site, based on what should be a thread with good issue based discussion.

Seconded.

[Cowlesy]

I trust your judgment, Larry. I'll try and get a contribution approved tomorrow --- Dodd-Frank is going to cause chaos in the investment world, so Mr. Frank needs to be shown the door.

[Austrian Econ Disciple]

Ah here we go, I lost credibility? So now it is personal attacks. You were one of the few posters I had respect for here. Listen here is the deal..I rah rahed for Scott Brown? Find the post prove it or troll elsewhere. Because frankly you are being dishonest here and that is sad.

Because of Scott Brown being elected a much more far reaching and intrusive bill was scrapped. The Health Care bill was postponed, and the Dems resorted to dirty tactics to pass a bill WITHOUT going back to the senate. This is when the backroom deals and slimeball tactics that were being used got attention and has made this bill unpopular today.

And please lecture someone else about the warfare state versus the welfare state. You simply ignore the fact that the welfare state has grown more than ANY other aspect of government. More laws have been created for the domestic/progressive agenda than for the warfare state. We have completely unmanageable welfare state that has unfunded liabilities that makes the head spin

Add to this we literally outright lie to people and rob them of any means to care for themselves in their old age only to give them a big pile of fraud and broken promises when they have wasted their years and cannot support themselves. You have no perspective, if you support Dems, especially the current crop of them then I suppose we know where you stand.

It's insane really. You ask people to stop supporting neocons and warmongers when the GOP was in office. I DID this and so did many others. The Neocons are being primaried and defeated like mad, establishment GOPers are in full retreat. Yet as a hypocrite you sit on your hands while the Democrats destroy our freedoms and run this country into even greater debt. I am sorry I am having real problems respecting people like this.

I fight against neocons, many do, they are ousted..yet when a group of dems come in who are as bad or far far worse the same people screaming out against the GOP sit by and watch. It does not go unnoticed.

Look, I agree there is a major problem on all fronts. I was merely observing and articulating why one person would see Frank as the lesser evil of Belat.

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?t=227407&highlight=Scott+Brown&page=5

Just one thread that you exalted Scott Brown. You say you fight Neo's, but Brown is your arch-Neo! I am not the one being dishonest, you are. Hell I think you would elect the devil if he promised to 'halt' Obamacare. Ah, yes, it was because of Scott Brown that all the fuss over the bill was started, but you forget, the only reason Brown got elected was because of the fuss over the bill! You got it backwards my friend.

Who said I supported Frank? I think I have said about three times now I would choose neither one...

What are you talking about? Both parties destroy liberty...I don't support either party because I realize what fraudsters they are. You are so enamored with the latest fashion you can't see the forest through the trees. The Republicans love people like you, after-all, it's been the same story for the past one-hundred years. Oh no! Democrats are destroying liberty, must elect GOP to stop socialism and communism! Oh no, GOP elected, they are instituting socialism and communism! Democrats sound good for liberty now! The see-saw effect will kill us all if people continue to fall for that crap.

[erowe1]

AED, it's not like liberals end the wars. With them you get wars plus a million social programs.

You are very naive.

I don't think you got what he was implying by his reference to Bastiat earlier.

You can't just compare the two things dollar for dollar.

With wars, you get shear destruction for your money spent. You allocate labor and resources to produce things solely to have them destroyed and to destroy other things, many of which you then allocate labor and resources to rebuild. In the end having devoted a great deal of capital to have a world in which there is less than what you started with.

With entitlements, you at least spend the money on something productive. Granted, it's not how the money would be spent in a free market, but it's not a net loss either, the way war is. And I mean this simply as an economic consideration, altogether apart from the fact that some people might differentiate ethically between spending money to send someone to school and spending money to dismember some innocent kid while killing his parents.

I also take issue with the claim that wars are temporary and entitlements are permanent. I understand the point and see the element of truth to it. But consider how wars result in long-term effects after they end, and look back over the history of American involvement in foreign wars up to now and see how they have a repeating pattern of one leading to another. It is likely that present interventions will produce blowback and other consequences that will become excuses for future ones. There is a cycle of foreign intervention that is hard to end just like the cycle of dependency on entitlements is hard to end.

Finally, even when you do compare the two dollar for dollar, you have to be careful to include everything in the military side of the ledger that belongs there. There are lots of places in the budget that it shows up, including a significant amount of our payments of interest on the debt.

When all's said and done, I'm not sure how to compare the two. Looking back at Bush, I definitely rate Medicare Part D and the Iraq War as by far the two worst things he ever did. Which of the two is worse on net, I don't know how to decide.

[Stary Hickory]

Look, I agree there is a major problem on all fronts. I was merely observing and articulating why one person would see Frank as the lesser evil of Belat.

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?t=227407&highlight=Scott+Brown&page=5

Just one thread that you exalted Scott Brown. You say you fight Neo's, but Brown is your arch-Neo! I am not the one being dishonest, you are. Hell I think you would elect the devil if he promised to 'halt' Obamacare. Ah, yes, it was because of Scott Brown that all the fuss over the bill was started, but you forget, the only reason Brown got elected was because of the fuss over the bill! You got it backwards my friend.

Who said I supported Frank? I think I have said about three times now I would choose neither one...

What are you talking about? Both parties destroy liberty...I don't support either party because I realize what fraudsters they are. You are so enamored with the latest fashion you can't see the forest through the trees. The Republicans love people like you, after-all, it's been the same story for the past one-hundred years. Oh no! Democrats are destroying liberty, must elect GOP to stop socialism and communism! Oh no, GOP elected, they are instituting socialism and communism! Democrats sound good for liberty now! The see-saw effect will kill us all if people continue to fall for that crap.

And that was not rah rahing for Scott Brown as you "put" it that was trying to get the filibuster vote in the Senate to stop the HC bill. let me ask you this if the government was all set to go to war and invade Iran would you or would you not support the single person regardless of his other views who would vote against it and stop it from happening?

Because I would support this person Dem or GOP. So keep your forest for the trees comments to your self. And do not paint me as a Scott Brown supporter please because it is dishonest. And also keep your rant to yourself about what I believe...I will tell you this, when it comes to what I believe.. I will tell you personally I don't need you to invent it for me.

If you are going to invent my views and then argue against them. I will just leave you to yourself because you obviously do not need me to help out.

[LukeP]

I'll say this, there is a lot of hate because of the newly enacted Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act. It totally has thrown a wrench in the spoke of many Forex traders. I'm sure there are a ton of terribly overreaching new government regulations but there are two that really boil my blood. One says how much leverage a US regulated broker is allowed to offer their clients cutting in half their previously mandated reduction. The second says that US clients are only allowed to do business with US regulated brokers! This is insane! Takes all the choice away from the consumer. I can't even explain how difficult this makes things. I know many people are very upset about this.

[ItsTime]

ll let me buy you a beer next time I'm in Boston.

[georgiaboy]

wow, to think that Frank could go down this November. dang.

[Cowlesy]

I'll say this, there is a lot of hate because of the newly enacted Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act. It totally has thrown a wrench in the spoke of many Forex traders. I'm sure there are a ton of terribly overreaching new government regulations but there are two that really boil my blood. One says how much leverage a US regulated broker is allowed to offer their clients cutting in half their previously mandated reduction. The second says that US clients are only allowed to do business with US regulated brokers! This is insane! Takes all the choice away from the consumer. I can't even explain how difficult this makes things. I know many people are very upset about this.

Not only that, but in the Healthcare Bill, the gov't wants to get their grubby little paws on all Gold Buys/Sells.

Gold is F'ING MONEY. It shouldn't be taxed. It's the people's way of voting against the inflation tax that destroys our Federal Reserve Note cash.

All these jackasses who voted for Obamacare and Dodd-Frank need to go. Thieves, all of them.

[lx43]

Thanks for the heads up on this canidate Larry. I want Frank to go because of his recently passed Winny-Dodd Financial Bill, his vote on Obamacare, his support of Fannie/Freddie and the list goes on.

[Jordan]

:eek: :eek: :eek: :eek:

If Frank loses MA 4 and Angle wins out west, two of the most well known democrats are toast.

Too bad John Dennis doesn't stand a chance in hell, a triple play with Pelosi would be great. :D

[Dianne]

It's about 20 years too late; but thank God for small blessings.

[sluggo]

Wasn't Barney Frank screwing one of Freddie/Fannie's bigwigs?

[libertarian4321]

Boy this is a skeptical crew. Almost makes me not want to bother to post here.

No, independents were included, which if you had read my original post you would know.

I feel thankful that I have so many geniuses here to educate me. NOT.

LL

Don't be surprised if people are skeptical. We've seen plenty of optimistic predictions before about campaigns that landed with a thud on election day.

Frank's district is Gerrymandered a Dem fiefdom. You know it's not in a district that is in play when the Republicans normally don't even contend it, and when they do, it's an amateur "name on the ballot" type of candidate that has no chance of even contending.

It's a month to the election, and no one has heard of the guy? How is that a formula for beating a Dem who's been in office for 30 years in a Dem district in a Dem state? Especially given that as of just over a month ago, he raised less than 1/10th the cash that Frank had.

Unless this young Republican is Superman, he's likely to get beat, and beat badly.

I'm no fan of Barney Frank, but I think we need to assess this guy's chances realistically. He may, for the first time, offer something more than token opposition to Frank, but his chances of winning are extremely slim.

[llepard]

Don't be surprised if people are skeptical. We've seen plenty of optimistic predictions before about campaigns that landed with a thud on election day.

Frank's district is Gerrymandered a Dem fiefdom. You know it's not in a district that is in play when the Republicans normally don't even contend it, and when they do, it's an amateur "name on the ballot" type of candidate that has no chance of even contending.

It's a month to the election, and no one has heard of the guy? How is that a formula for beating a Dem who's been in office for 30 years in a Dem district in a Dem state? Especially given that as of just over a month ago, he raised less than 1/10th the cash that Frank had.

Unless this young Republican is Superman, he's likely to get beat, and beat badly.

I'm no fan of Barney Frank, but I think we need to assess this guy's chances realistically. He may, for the first time, offer something more than token opposition to Frank, but his chances of winning are extremely slim.

Fair criticisms all. One of the few constructive posts to my comments.

Here is what I would say.

Barney has huge negatives in the polls. Lots of people do not like him--strongly. Against no candidate he polls 50% which is very low for an incumbent.

Barney is bumbling around. He has no organization. He has had no opposition for 20 plus years. He does not know how to campaign.

Barney is caustic. See the video. Caustic is bad in politics.

Barney is corrupt. All his money is special interest money.

Barney's seat was safe, until it wasn't.

The so called Kennedy seat was safe until Scott Brown. BTW Brown is a big disappointment.

People do not know Sean, but people will when he starts running TV.

Until a month ago I did not think there was a credible alternative. Once the alternative appears on TV people will think, hey? Maybe.

Lots of voters are undecided. Lots of voters in Mass are independents. Sean polls 70/30 with independents.

The anger out there against incumbents and the bail outs is HUGE. Barney is the public face of TARP.

Once it becomes clear that Sean is real and has a chance he will get money from every state in the union.

Does all this equal a win? That is why they have an election. My point is that this is big news and a surprise is certainly possible. I too have been disappointed and have supported candidates with no chance. But, I am just offering a heads up. This could be very interesting.

Go ahead, hit me with why i am all wet.

[Rocco]

Mr. Lepard,

I never insulted you, infact I went out of my way to credit your major contributions to this movement. All I wanted to know is your reasoning behind your thinking, and you provided that with your last post. Thanks for the heads up, while the Israel thing does trouble me I do believe this guy is leaps and bounds better then Frank and will keep an eye on this race.

[daviddee]

...

[Knightskye]

Finally, some people argue that we should slash defense spending in order to pay for social programs. I reject this view. Deficit reduction demands tough choices and we can find places to save within the Department of Defense, for example, through better procurement practices and reductions to the defense civilian workforce. However, we must never put social policies or spending goals ahead of national security. Defense is at the core of what governments should provide and it is dangerous to arbitrarily decide that we need 25% or 30% cuts to our defense spending.


We should adhere to the Constitution and only fight in conflicts that receive a majority vote in Congress through a Declaration of War.

So, he would vote to knock $25 billion off the Pentagon's budget, and then declare war on Iran.

Whoopee, we're all gonna die.


YouTube - Country Joe McDonald - "Feel Like I'm Fixing To Die" (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LBdeCxJmcAo)

[cindy25]

:eek: :eek: :eek: :eek:

If Frank loses MA 4 and Angle wins out west, two of the most well known democrats are toast.

Too bad John Dennis doesn't stand a chance in hell, a triple play with Pelosi would be great. :D

Dennis can try again in January, in the by-election, after ex-speaker Pelosi resigns

[llepard]

Please tell Sean to spend some of that money to do a montage of Barney's greatest hits... and run it on the TV. Internet only does so much. Clips from 2004/2005/2006 "There is no problem with Fannie/Freddie" 2010 "I wanted to shut them down"

Side note: Amazes me that you still live in that shit hole. I left there 13 years ago and never looked back.

Check this out, just what you asked for:

www.retirebarney.com

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?t=263499

One minute of pure genius from Barney. LL

[itshappening]

Sorry Lawrie, this is just optimistic. Barney will beat him easily.

it doesn't make me feel good saying that.

there is no time for the voters to get to know this guy or for the money to come in, the election is done here.

It was never done in the case of Coakley because that is statewide not against an incumbent in a district.

Could Brown have beaten Kennedy? that's a better comparison.

[llepard]

Sorry Lawrie, this is just optimistic. Barney will beat him easily.

it doesn't make me feel good saying that.

there is no time for the voters to get to know this guy or for the money to come in, the election is done here.

It was never done in the case of Coakley because that is statewide not against an incumbent in a district.

Could Brown have beaten Kennedy? that's a better comparison.

You may be right. But let's wait and see....

Frank has much higher negatives than Kennedy ever did.

[libertarian4321]

Fair criticisms all. One of the few constructive posts to my comments.

Here is what I would say.

Barney has huge negatives in the polls. Lots of people do not like him--strongly. Against no candidate he polls 50% which is very low for an incumbent.

Barney is bumbling around. He has no organization. He has had no opposition for 20 plus years. He does not know how to campaign.



I think that is the case with many in Congress, from both parties, who have been Gerrymandered into "jobs for life." They aren't skilled at campaigning because they never have to.


Barney is caustic. See the video. Caustic is bad in politics.

Usually, that would be the case. However, in extremely liberal districts, I think a lot of voters like seeing guys like Barney Frank poke a stick in the eye of Republicans.


Barney is corrupt. All his money is special interest money.

This statement would apply to probably 90+% of the members of the US House.


Barney's seat was safe, until it wasn't.

The so called Kennedy seat was safe until Scott Brown. BTW Brown is a big disappointment.

Beating Frank an incumbent like Frank, in a district that is demographically more Dem than the state of MA as a whole, without any money, is going to be much tougher task than a well funded candidate like Brown had in beating a really bad candidate like Coakley in an open race.


People do not know Sean, but people will when he starts running TV.

Until a month ago I did not think there was a credible alternative. Once the alternative appears on TV people will think, hey? Maybe.

Lots of voters are undecided. Lots of voters in Mass are independents. Sean polls 70/30 with independents.

The anger out there against incumbents and the bail outs is HUGE. Barney is the public face of TARP.


All that might allow a good Republican to at least make Frank work for it a bit, but I can't imagine he'll get a win.



Once it becomes clear that Sean is real and has a chance he will get money from every state in the union.

It's very late in the game. When does he plan on letting people know he has a chance?

In order for money to come in and make a difference, he would need it now (more like a month ago)- the election is less than a month away. Money that pours in at the last minute is unlikely to do much good (something we all learned when RP got a ton of money very late in the campaign).


Does all this equal a win? That is why they have an election. My point is that this is big news and a surprise is certainly possible.

I have a friend who went to college at New Mexico and played football there many years ago- he's a die hard fan, who always thinks every year will be "their year."

He is such a zealous fan that he lets himself be blinded to the reality of things.

He thought NM had a chance heading into the season opener against Oregon. I told him he was nuts.

He laid out his case. Both teams were 0-0. Oregon had lost it's star quarterback Jeremiah Masoli and were left with a new, unproven QB. NM had some young studs in the secondary who were going to make the Oregon QB miserable. On top of that, NM had a sophomore QB and WR who were "looking good" in practice and could give NM some scoring punch.

With the right combination of luck, a few miscues by Oregon, and a good showing by a few of the new players for underdog NM, they just might have a shot at beating the heavily favored team from Oregon.

I mean it was possible, right? That's why they play the game.

Unfortunately, reality set in quickly for the Lobos on the way to a (highly predictable to anyone but die hard NM fans) 72-0 butt whipping.

Given the circumstances as we know them now, I'd predict Frank will win almost as easily. His district isn't the most uncompetitive in the nation- certainly not as lopsided as Nancy Pelosi's district, but it's highly skewed to favor the Dems.

I think a lot of folks here have the same sort of unrealistic expectations- thinking Peter Schiff or Adam Kokesh was going to win, or thinking John Dennis is going to beat Pelosi just because they really liked those candidates- even though demographic, polling, and finance numbers should tell them that those candidates have/had no chance.

Even a well funded, top flight Republican candidate, in an anti-incumbent year would have a heck of an uphill climb in this one. With very little money and less than a month to go, I just don't see how the Republican even makes this one close. At best, he makes a much better showing than the token candidates Frank has faced in the past.

If I was in MA, I'd vote for the Republican, but I vote for a lot of candidates who I know don't have a chance.

I hope I'm wrong in my prediction, but I doubt that I am.

[Bern]

What a great way to start the day (finding this thread). Thanks LL. I read the piece in the Washington Examiner (http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/politics/A-GOP-unknown-is-in-striking-range-of-Barney-Frank-1063388-104114343.html) a week ago and I was so F'n pumped that Barney Frank might go down. I started spreading the word in various nooks and crannies of the interweb where I dwell.

I've been tirelessly bleating about the need to dismantle the machine. You have to remove the key cogs. Barney Frank is about as key a cog as you are going to find. I'd support an insane lunatic asylum patient if they had a decent chance of unseating Barney Frank.

This quote from the Wall Stree Journal just about says it all:
...
"It's much more of a race than it has been in prior years, but from our perspective, it would be a real loss to Massachusetts if Barney's not re-elected," said Daniel Forte, president of the Massachusetts Bankers Association, a trade group. ...

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704847104575532390507431912.html

[llepard]

I think a lot of folks here have the same sort of unrealistic expectations- thinking Peter Schiff or Adam Kokesh was going to win, or thinking John Dennis is going to beat Pelosi just because they really liked those candidates- even though demographic, polling, and finance numbers should tell them that those candidates have/had no chance.

Even a well funded, top flight Republican candidate, in an anti-incumbent year would have a heck of an uphill climb in this one. With very little money and less than a month to go, I just don't see how the Republican even makes this one close. At best, he makes a much better showing than the token candidates Frank has faced in the past.

If I was in MA, I'd vote for the Republican, but I vote for a lot of candidates who I know don't have a chance.

I hope I'm wrong in my prediction, but I doubt that I am.

I hear you, good analysis. I knew Kokesh would lose, the numbers were awful. I knew Schiff would lose, same story. I know that based on my rhetoric people think I am just some wild eyed supporter. Frankly, I am rather luke warm on Sean. I just think Barney has dug himself a real hole with this financial thing. He is the poster boy of bad financial management.

See www.retirebarney.com watch the video. Hilarious.

Bielat is good enough. He may lose, but it will not be a blow out. And of course there is a reason they play the games.

[Austrian Econ Disciple]

What a great way to start the day (finding this thread). Thanks LL. I read the piece in the Washington Examiner (http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/politics/A-GOP-unknown-is-in-striking-range-of-Barney-Frank-1063388-104114343.html) a week ago and I was so F'n pumped that Barney Frank might go down. I started spreading the word in various nooks and crannies of the interweb where I dwell.

I've been tirelessly bleating about the need to dismantle the machine. You have to remove the key cogs. Barney Frank is about as key a cog as you are going to find. I'd support an insane lunatic asylum patient if they had a decent chance of unseating Barney Frank.

This quote from the Wall Stree Journal just about says it all:

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704847104575532390507431912.html


And they'll proceed to buy out the next guy...what have you solved? Just defeating someone doesn't ensure anything.

[Bern]

And they'll proceed to buy out the next guy...what have you solved? Just defeating someone doesn't ensure anything.

Well, for one thing, it removes Frank from chairmanship of the Financial Services Committee, which is a pretty big deal.

[Austrian Econ Disciple]

Well, for one thing, it removes Frank from chairmanship of the Financial Services Committee, which is a pretty big deal.

Hopefully Mel Watt won't get the nod with Frank's absence...

[specsaregood]

Hopefully Mel Watt won't get the nod with Frank's absence...

Well hopefully we get a Republican controlled congress. Dr. Paul has got to be near the top of the seniority list.

[fatjohn]

If Frank loses I will streak up and down the street, Ill post pics too :-)

Hah, we'll hold you for this one. It would not be the first for these forums. You might be fairly new so you might not know this. Look up the collins.

[wormyguy]

Dennis can try again in January, in the by-election, after ex-speaker Pelosi resigns

Pelosi can just resign her Speaker position without resigning her congressional seat.

[Cowlesy]

Authorization was approved for Cowlesy in the amount of $250.00 on 10/08/2010. Your confirmation number is VLEE6B074204.

This message confirms that you have successfully donated to Sean Bielat for Congress. You will also be receiving an e-mail confirming your donation shortly. Thanks for your support!

Please note: Your contribution will be listed as "eDonation" on your statement.

Hopefully this helps get that +1 vote somewhere to topple Frank.

[specsaregood]

Pelosi can just resign her Speaker position without resigning her congressional seat.

Traditionally that isn't the case though.

[Bern]

This is priceless theater right here:

http://www.seanbielat.org/blog/2010-10-07/response-letter-barney-frank

Good stuff.

[Aratus]

mr. bielat is getting local coverage and is evidently polling closer to barney frank.
ms. tsongas's GOP challenger has sent me liturature and is less high profile on
our mass media. if a week out we have our ten Democrats 'even steven' with
their GOP challengers and/or any independents in the races up here, expect a
surge not unlike that of scott brown this january for all GOP or tea party people!

[llepard]

This is priceless theater right here:

http://www.seanbielat.org/blog/2010-10-07/response-letter-barney-frank

Good stuff.

Thanks for that. Excellent.


mr. bielat is getting local coverage and is evidently polling closer to barney frank.
ms. tsongas's GOP challenger has sent me liturature and is less high profile on
our mass media. if a week out we have our ten Democrats 'even steven' with
their GOP challengers and/or any independents in the races up here, expect a
surge not unlike that of scott brown this january for all GOP or tea party people!

Thanks, maybe others on this forum will begin to see our points.

Thanks Cowlesy.

Hey all, if you want political theatre just wait until the debates. Barney is going to self immolate. No way he does not lose it and cost himself the election.

LL

[Bergie Bergeron]

Kick the bums out !!

[Bergie Bergeron]

He's having a moneybomb today: http://www.byebyebarney.org/

[Bergie Bergeron]

bump

[Anti Federalist]

bump

Yah beat me to it "bump" in light of the other thread.

Thanks.

[Bergie Bergeron]

YouTube - Sean Bielat TV Ad, "Same Old Tune" (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5ZS1TP0DU2c&feature=player_embedded)

[specsaregood]

http://dailycaller.com/2010/10/20/barney-frank-scrambles-for-cash-finds-some-in-own-pocket
Barney Frank scrambles for cash, finds some in own pocket
Excerpts:



After a series of difficult moments on the campaign trail, Rep. Barney Frank is scrambling for campaign cash, contributing $200,000 of his own money as he seeks to ward off his first serious Republican challenger in decades.
...

Besides donating his own cash, numerous bankers from New York City are stepping in to give Frank a last-minute boost.

Financial disclosure forms reveal that in one 48-hour reporting period, Frank received more than $18,000 from a collection of bankers and lawyers in New York, New York.


It appears the bankers don't want to lose one of their pets.

[Anti Federalist]

Interesting to note that RCP has no polling data on this race.

I'm assuming because everybody thought it so stitched up for Frank, that nobody bothered to poll the MA4 district.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2010/house/ma/massachusetts_4th_district_bielat_vs_frank-1706.html

Hubris is a dangerous fault.

[Brett]

This is excellent news, it's great to hear :)

[libertybrewcity]

I just had breakfast with Sean Bielat, the Repbulican challenger to Barney Frank in the Mass. 4th District.

You heard it here first. Barney is going to lose.

Internal polling shows Bielat is within 10 points of Frank and no one even knows who Bielat is yet. Bielat polls 70/30 over Frank among independents. He is a very good candidate for this seat. www.seanbielat.org

Bielat is 35 years old and very smart. He "gets it". He is not perfect in terms of being a Ron Paul candidate, but he is close. Very close. He would be a huge improvement over Barney. I have supported him.

LL

no one knows him yet?? I don't know if you noticed but the elections are in a less than two weeks...so when are they going to get to know him?

[low preference guy]

no one knows him yet?? I don't know if you noticed but the elections are in a less than two weeks...so when are they going to get to know him?

i don't know if you noticed, but the date of the op you're quoting is two weeks ago and a lot has happened since.

[libertarian4321]

Barney Frank is scrambling for campaign cash, contributing $200,000 of his own money as he seeks to ward off his first serious Republican challenger in decades.

Well, at least the challenger is making him work for it a bit.

I'm a little surprised Bielat hasn't been able to pull in more money. John Dennis is getting a ton of money from outside his district because he's running against Pelosi.

I would think Barney Frank would be at least as heavily despised as Pelosi- and with money this guy might have had a shot (it's far too late now, I think). Although this is a strong Dem district, it's not completely hopeless like Pelosi's district.

[AGRP]

Please explain how he "gets it". All I know is that he was a democrat that changed to a republican to run against Barney.

Even if this is the case, the fact that people with so much clout such as Frank leaving office is nothing but a positive.

[libertybrewcity]

i don't know if you noticed, but the date of the op you're quoting is two weeks ago and a lot has happened since.

true. didn't see that. muh bad

[Bern]

... I would think Barney Frank would be at least as heavily despised as Pelosi- ...

Pelosi took the point on the health care bill, cap and trade, etc., etc. Her condescending and arrogant attitude also doesn't play well. I believe that Ms. "We'll have to pass it to find out what's in it." is despised by a much larger demographic than Mr. Fannie and Freddie.

[teacherone]

BUMP let's bring Barney down!


The United States has understood, more than any nation in recent history that with great power comes great responsibility. As the world’s sole military superpower, we must be slow to undertake military action--I say this as a Marine. We must only employ our military might when it is clearly in the national interest. Unfortunately, over the past few decades, we have seen several military engagements that did not pass this test.

Article I of the Constitution gives Congress the exclusive right to declare war. Despite major conflicts in Korea, Vietnam, Afghanistan, and Iraq, the U.S. has not fought in a declared war since World War II. Our founding fathers wisely gave the power to declare war to the representatives of the people; if the people do not believe that a conflict is in their national interest, then it is not. We should adhere to the Constitution and only fight in conflicts that receive a majority vote in Congress through a Declaration of War. The federal government’s chief role is to protect her people and the process for doing so is clearly articulated in the Constitution.

http://seanbielat.org/strong-national-defense

[Aratus]

FOX tv up here spent its morning hours delving into the further lack of an apology by the dynamic duo!

[HOLLYWOOD]

Has that POS Senator Scott Brown endorsed Sean Bielat?

Check this out!

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-20020175-503544.html

Barney Frank Loans Campaign $200K as He Fights Tea Party Challenge
http://i.i.com.com/cnwk.1d/i/tim/2010/10/20/image6975529_370x278.jpg


Sitting in the crosshairs of the Tea Party Express and other conservative operations, longtime Democratic Rep. Barney Frank is ratcheting up his efforts to defend his Massachusetts seat.
The Democrat gave his re-election campaign $200,000 this week, Politico reports (http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1010/43860.html), to fend off Republican challenger Sean Bielat. Financial disclosure files reportedly showed Frank's assets to be worth between $560,000 and $1.5 million, though the representative is not required to disclose the worth of his primary residence.


Bielat, a 35-year-old Marine with an Ivy League pedigree, is giving Frank a run for his money. The Republican released an internal poll last month showing Frank ahead by 10 points, 48 to 38. While that still gives Frank a comfortable lead -- CBS News has labeled the race as probable Democrat (http://www.cbsnews.com/election2010) -- he cannot take his seat for granted. Even though Massachusetts' fourth district easily sided with Barack Obama in 2008, it also narrowly favored Republican Scott Brown in the 2010 Senate special election.
Bielat has railed against Frank's role as chair of the House Financial Services Committee, and his attacked are buttressed by those from the Tea Party Express, the California-based group that helped Christine O'Donnell win the Republican Senate primary in Connecticut and helped conservative Joe Miller topple sitting Republican Sen. Lisa Murkowski in the Alaska primary.


The Tea Party Express sent an "urgent" e-mail (http://paracom.paramountcommunication.com/hostedemail/email.htm?h=a9c2609d77c77095270a862f2926596e&CID=7191391934&ch=907C1954CB1C3EA2DF5DB30D511432FD) to their supporters this week soliciting donations to air its "defeat Barney Frank" television ads, now in production.
Critical Contests: CBS News Election 2010 Race Ratings (http://www.cbsnews.com/election2010)

[/URL][URL="http://www.cbsnews.com/election2010"]See all Ratings for Senate, House and Governors in an Interactive Map (Updated Oct. 18) (http://www.cbsnews.com/election2010)

"You can help us Defeat Barney Frank - one of the worst liberals in Congress - and make history," the e-mail read. The conservative Nevada political action committee Western Representation PAC is also investing in a campaign against Frank, with a pledge to spend $200,000 in ads against Frank and his fellow Massachusetts Democratic Rep. James McGovern, the Attleboro Sun Chroniclereports (http://www.thesunchronicle.com/articles/2010/10/16/news/8107677.txt).


Meanwhile, the anti-abortion rights group the Susan B. Anthony List is also campaigning against the 15-term Democrat. As part of a $1 million nationwide mail campaign, the group sent Frank's constituents pamphlets that said he "votes 'NO' on Massachusetts values."
Frank used the pamphlets to solicit money from his supporters in a e-mail with the subject line "Pro-choice or no choice?" The e-mail blasts Bielat for being against abortion rights. It also mentions his opponent's Tea Party support.



"I take these developments extremely seriously, not only because of the threat to my candidacy, but because of the dangers they pose to the values we share," the e-mail reads.



"You can help me prevent the right-wing from turning back the clock on reproductive rights."

[osan]

Me too. I had a lot of correspondence going with Frank. When I demanded he resign he stopped responding to my letters.

LL

How typical. Instead of addressing your concerns in an attempt to demonstrate how his approach is correct, he goes black on you.

If his ilk are tossed out this cycle, I will have at least some bare threads upon which to hang some hope for our future.

I've not seen much talk here of concerns of voter fraud for this election. Have I just missed it all or has the topic not been deemed worthy of gum-time? Given what is apparently at stake, is there not some nontrivial motivation for the Pelosis, Boxers, Reids, and Franks of the world to take very practical measures to best ensure their reelection? Just wondering what you all think about it.

[TCE]

http://www.wpri.com/generic/news/politics/congress/massachusetts-cd4-poll-results

Non-Partisan poll shows Frank with a 12 point lead. Less than two weeks until the election. Translation: Bielat has effectively no chance.

[low preference guy]

http://www.wpri.com/generic/news/politics/congress/massachusetts-cd4-poll-results

Non-Partisan poll shows Frank with a 12 point lead. Less than two weeks until the election. Translation: Bielat has effectively no chance.

how was Murcowsky polling two weeks before she lost to Miller?

[TCE]

how was Murcowsky polling two weeks before she lost to Miller?

The most reliable poll of that race was taken six weeks before the Primary, making it essentially useless. As Nate Silver put it, "a six-week old poll is as useful as a six-week old tuna sandwich."

[Bern]

... Non-Partisan poll shows Frank with a 12 point lead. Less than two weeks until the election. Translation: Bielat has effectively no chance.

Lies, damned lies and statistics....

That phone poll covered 400 random people. Of the people who self identified as Dem, GOP and independent, the results show:

Democratic - Frank 80.4%, Bielat 10.7%, Not Sure 7.7% / Refused 1.2%
Republican - Frank 6.3%, Bielat 92.2%, Don't Know *
Independent - Frank 34.8%, Bielat 44.1%, Not Sure 16.8%

What they didn't report is what percentage of those polled identified themselves as Dem, GOP or independent and how that compares to the state wide averages. In other words, if the poll canvasses a higher proportion of Dems than exist state wide, the poll will show a Dem skew/bias.

Some of the better polling methodologies sample voter rolls to ensure they are sampling people not only eligible to vote, but who have a history of voting, and they balance the survey sample to represent the statewide average (to normalize the results for bias).

$.02

[Epic]

Guys, House Polls always show incumbents winning. The undecided vote always breaks the challenger's way, and as people learn about the challenger, they switch over.

[MelissaWV]

1. Knows the whole system is corrupt.
2. Thinks there is enormous pay to play going on.
3. Believes in reduced govt.
4. Believes in balancing budget.
5. Is a businessman.
6. Believes in border enforcement.
7. Believes wars should be voted on in Congress.
8. Believes there is enormous fat in the defense budget and it must be cut.
9. Knows that entitlements must be reined in/restructured/reduced.

On social issues he is a moderate/liberal.

Not to rain on your parade, but that "getting it" can also be the same thing that someone uses as justification to bite the people in the butt. I'll elaborate:

1. Decides we need better oversight and to replace people. Launches investigations into everything, not necessarily yielding results but spending money in the process.
2. See above: Investigating "pay to play" generally doesn't fix it.
3. ...but he's running for Government. Some people can be trusted to run for an office they want to diminish, but most cannot; only time will tell.
4. Good luck with that. Believing in something and having the power to do it are two different things, but more importantly almost every politician has an exception or twenty to believing the budget should be balanced. With some, it's "national defense" while with others it's "when our economy is down."
5. I don't think there's room in a post to list the number of "businessmen" who have been or would be really, really bad for this country.
6. The most ominous of the points, because "border enforcement" can be quite expensive, be the exception I was discussing in point 4, and lead to misguided laws that impact all of us (like RealID, greater empowerment of the police, more centralized information databases, etc.).
7. A good one :) A clear position, but one hopes it doesn't wind up the way of the Dodo the first time we have a "conflict" and a vote for funding it comes along.
8. & 9. Vague. How much cutting? By what means shall it be cut? (Please don't say there needs to be an investigation to figure out what's best to cut!)

I'm not saying the guy's bad. I'm saying that jumping on the man's bandwagon necessitates a lot more than the points you posted.

But, above all else, I can't think of anyone that could really do much worse than Barney Frank... so... eh.

[TNforPaul45]

Fair point. The interesting thing here is that I think Frank loses. Hallelujah!

Really good to see you, llepard! Welcome back!

[Aratus]

some 200,ooo grand went from a retirement fund into the political swing of things...?

poor rep. barney frank is not in mitt romney's or meg whitman's ebay league at all!!!

by election day, EDMUND "PAT" BROWN's balding 'governor moonbeam' kid will have

spent only 2 to 5 million as MILLIONAIRE MEG spends between 150 to 200 million???

[TCE]

Lies, damned lies and statistics....

That phone poll covered 400 random people. Of the people who self identified as Dem, GOP and independent, the results show:

Democratic - Frank 80.4%, Bielat 10.7%, Not Sure 7.7% / Refused 1.2%
Republican - Frank 6.3%, Bielat 92.2%, Don't Know *
Independent - Frank 34.8%, Bielat 44.1%, Not Sure 16.8%

What they didn't report is what percentage of those polled identified themselves as Dem, GOP or independent and how that compares to the state wide averages. In other words, if the poll canvasses a higher proportion of Dems than exist state wide, the poll will show a Dem skew/bias.

Some of the better polling methodologies sample voter rolls to ensure they are sampling people not only eligible to vote, but who have a history of voting, and they balance the survey sample to represent the statewide average (to normalize the results for bias).

$.02

10% of Democrats and 44% of Independents breaking off for him is more than generous. People in Frank's district LOVE him. The fact that 20% of Democrats might not vote for him is insane. PPP does it the same way. Just ask voters what their affiliation is.


Guys, House Polls always show incumbents winning. The undecided vote always breaks the challenger's way, and as people learn about the challenger, they switch over.

Actually, not even close. This year, around 50 districts show their incumbents LOSING. That is why the Republicans will make up so many seats. They do not always break for the challenger. If anything, it is roughly 60% for Challenger, 40% for the Incumbent at best. Barney Frank will win this race. I say that with 96% certainty.

Aratus: He's not going to spend it, he's just doing that to make the race seem urgent to Democrats who will get out and vote for him thinking he's in trouble since the governor's race is the only big race in MA this year.

[Aratus]

jerry "moonbeam" brown jist got meg whitman to be at least a 150 million stimulus package for good ole california?

TCE --- i had thought poor barney frank was about to vaporize his bank account so as to keep his very d.c day job!!!

[Bergie Bergeron]

UPDATE -- From MA-04: A Bielat aide emails me to report "very high" turnout across the district, which "favors us." Also mentions that WHDH-TV (Boston's NBC affiliate) is reporting that Barney Frank's camp is "worried."
http://townhall.com/tipsheet/GuyBenson/2010/11/02/scott_brown,_mitt_romney_stump_for_jeff_perry_in_m a-10

[teacherone]

oh man... if barney goes down i'll freak out... (in a good way :)

[Bergie Bergeron]

Barney won...
61
36

[wormyguy]

Barney won...
61
36
Not only that, but he probably gave the governorship to Deval Patrick - by merely creating the perception of a close race, he drove up turnout in his heavily-Democratic district.

[DFF]

CNBC reported that he lost.

[HOLLYWOOD]

Landslide... indoctrination is embedded and bred at an early age in TAXACHUSETTS

[Chieppa1]

CNBC reported that he lost.

really?

[paulitics]

The state is unsalvageable.

[TCE]

And I was attacked for saying Bielat had no chance...

[FrankRep]

Drudge Report: BARNEY FRANK WINS! (http://www.drudgereport.com/)

Frank easily wins re-election, defeats Bielat (http://www.boston.com/news/local/breaking_news/2010/11/frank_easily_wi.html)

Boston Globe
Nov 2, 2010

[MozoVote]

Frank shovels pork home to his district, they love him. This is not a big surprise.

[SilentBull]

People in MA are brain dead. I'm leaving the state within a year. Let's see what happens when they run out of tax payers.

[Bergie Bergeron]

People in MA are brain dead. I'm leaving the state within a year. Let's see what happens when they run out of tax payers.
http://www.freestateproject.org/

:)

[AuH20]

Frank shovels pork home to his district, they love him. This is not a big surprise.

Have you ever seen his district? It looks like 4 year old child drew it.

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_J_qZnr9WO3U/S-BQczRjd1I/AAAAAAAAAJM/96ChSNTOu7w/s1600/MA04_110.gif

[purplechoe]

http://www.fireandreamitchell.com/wp-content/gallery/random/bankingqueen.jpg

http://prof77.files.wordpress.com/2009/12/barney-frank.jpg

[Kylie]

The people of MA are fucking idiots and deserve what they get.

Or there was major voter fraud.

I'm guessing the former.

[osan]

The people of MA are fucking idiots and deserve what they get.

Or there was major voter fraud.

I'm guessing the former.

Can we send MA out to sea and sink it?

[Bern]

Bumping old thread... Barney is not going to run for re-election:

http://news.yahoo.com/barney-frank-leave-congress-152402907.html

llepard - any word on whether Sean is going to run again?

[kylejack]

You heard it here first. Barney is going to lose.

Internal polling shows Bielat is within 10 points of Frank and no one even knows who Bielat is yet.
Welp.

[llepard]

Bumping old thread... Barney is not going to run for re-election:

http://news.yahoo.com/barney-frank-leave-congress-152402907.html

llepard - any word on whether Sean is going to run again?

No idea. Also, Bielat is not as good as I originally thought. Not all bad, but he is a politician. There are better choices.

Good riddance to Barney. I have been sending him emails calling for his resignation for years. Maybe he listened......

With the shit show that is now Washington, DC, Barney is proving to be smarter than I thought in resigning.

[LibertyEagle]

I'm surprised more of the rats aren't jumping off the ship before it sinks.

[Bern]

OK. Thanks. Please let us know if anyone worth supporting runs for Barney's seat.