March 2017

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
      1 2 3 4
5 6 7 8 9 10 11
12 13 14 15 16 17 18
19 20 21 22 23 24 25
26 27 28 29 30 31  

« PAC power | Main | Getting closer... »

May 03, 2006

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Anonymous

As someone who had to put up with Robinson and his crazy antics when I lived in Winston-Salem, I think it is also worth noting that none of those donors is from the one city in which he has ever won an election.

8 years of Vernon was more than enough.

Bubba

Hmm....let's see.

Miller has contributions from more than 300 PACs. How many of them are from NC? How many of them have convenient K St. offices from which it's an easy walk down to Brad's office?

(from Roch's earlier link)

http://query.nictusa.com/cgi-bin/can_give/2005_H2NC13029

Bubba

Thanks for the correction, Roch. Only 110? THAT changes everything!

Roch101

Bubba,

I wasn't attempting to "change" anything other than a factual error in my previous comment.

Bubba

Ummmm, I wasn't referring to you, Roch.

Roch101

Bubba:

Oh. When you wrote:

"Thanks for the correction, Roch. Only 110? THAT changes everything!"

I thought you were addressing me, seeing as how my name is Roch and all. My bad.

Bubba

"THAT changes everything!" was not addressed to you.

But if you like, I can modify that statement to include you, if you need it to make some obscure point or such.

Fred Gregory

From the looks of Miller's list ( not Chaucer ) a lot of trial lawyers and their employees( ? ) are contribting. Gee don't suppose he is using the John Edwards gambit of providing poor little ole paralegals the money to give so as to get around limits set by silly laws ?

Roch101

No, Bubba. Why don't we move on.

I find it disconcerting that Miller gets about 40% of his financial support from PACs. I'd much prefer that a candidate not accept any PAC money. I'm told that's unrealistic. Several of the PACs represent NC interests, many more do not. A stike against Miller in my book? Yep. A little one. Now, what's the significance on your scorecard of the lack of in-state support for Robinson, if I may ask?

Bubba

"Now, what's the significance on your scorecard of the lack of in-state support for Robinson, if I may ask?"

Fundraising for the general election is just begining. Let's have this discussion in September or October.

Danny Wright

Yeah, because by then Robinson will have MORE stupid commercials that will have done their job in alienating the middle third and we can all laugh about it.

Roch101

Bubba,

Sure. Of course you could have started this thread with "Let's have this discussion in October."

Bubba

(sigh)

"Sure. Of course you could have started this thread with "Let's have this discussion in October."

In my original comment, I was addressing the transparency of the nature of Miller's campaign money so far. I'm particularly interested in the number and nature of PAC contributions.

You then went back to talking about the Robinson contributions. I said it was too early to comment on that issue. That obviously didn't play well enough into the intentions of portraying Robinson in a negative light, so I understand your consternation with me turning the subject back to Miller, in reference to your earlier link regarding the nature of his campaign contributions.

I'm sorry you didn't like my observations about Miller's campaign money, but if we continue on the Miller thread, there will be much more to talk about.


Roch101

Right, Bubba. I got you the first time. It's perfectly appropriate to talk about Miller's campaign contributions at this time, but when confronted with a question about Robonson's contributions, you decide that's a conversation better left for October. You are prefectly clear.

Roch101

"I'm sorry you didn't like my observations about Miller's campaign money..." -- Bubba

"I find it disconcerting that Miller gets about 40% of his financial support from PACs. I'd much prefer that a candidate not accept any PAC money." -- Roch

Bubba, I did not say that I disliked your observations about Miller's campaign contributions. Please read for comprehension and don't put words in my mouth. It is irritating when you distort the opinion of someone who is agreeing with you just so you can manufacture an argument.

Bubba

"I find it disconcerting that Miller gets about 40% of his financial support from PACs. I'd much prefer that a candidate not accept any PAC money." -- Roch"

"Disconcerting" is not the word I would use in talking about Miller and the PACs.

"It is irritating when you distort the opinion of someone who is agreeing with you just so you can manufacture an argument."

Whatever. Just go back to complaining aboput Robinson. We will discuss campaign contributions for both candidates later.

Roch101

"Just go back to complaining aboput Robinson." -- Bubba

What is with the misrepresentations, Bubba? Anybody who bothers to read what is posted here (a suggestion you repeatedly ignore) will see that I was not complaining about Robinson. I'd hate to think that your distortions of other people's views and comments are of intellectual dishonesty but they can't be anything less than sloppiness at best. You can do better. Yes?

Bubba

"I'd hate to think that your distortions of other people's views and comments are of intellectual dishonesty but they can't be anything less than sloppiness at best. You can do better. Yes?"

Oh please, spare me the self righteousnes and the accompanying indignation.

It's not what you can read in the words that are written, it's what's NOT written but well placed between the lines that matter.

Distortion of other peoples views! Inrellectual dishonesty!

Sure, Roch. Whatever you say.

Keep on posting.

Bubba

I was right in my post yesterday. You DID need me to include you in that earlier reference so that you could make some obscure point.

Thanks for the validation, Roch.

Roch101

"it's what's NOT written but well placed between the lines that matter. -- Bubba

Bubba, are you hitting on me?

Bubba

You've been watching too much of "The Sopranos", Roch.

The comments to this entry are closed.