Wisconsin Eye has a video of the entire forum archived at their site, and it can be found here.
I won't go into the Assembly race here, except to say that Pasch is obviously the much stronger candidate.
Regarding the Senate race, Alberta Darling probably was wishing she was at the driving range, or anywhere else for that matter. She did not have a good day.
Some highlights, with the approximate time on the Wisconsin Eye video:
For someone who had picked up the Right To Life endorsement, I'm sure she didn't make many friends among her neocon base by apologizing for her vote in favor of the "Conscious Clause," and basically through all her pro-life backers under the bus. (Approx. 1 hr 6 min)
Darling further alienates her conservative backers by stating that she backs a state wide smoking ban. (Approx. 1 hr 18 min)
One voter confronted Darling on her abusive and offensive robocall, which features Mark Belling literally screaming on his radio show. The voter really let her have it, severely admonishing her for her lack of class and decorum. The voter said that it shows what she really thinks of her constituents. Darling ended up apologizing for that as well. (Approx. 1 hr 23 min)
To hear the offending call, WisPolitics.com has it up as a podcast.
Immediately, after the apology, Darling tried to again offer up her unsubstantiated allegations of Wasserman breaking his no tax pledge. Wasserman quickly pointed out that Darling is lying. He pointed out that if it was true, she would be pointing out to the specific vote(s) in which Wasserman voted to specifically raise taxes. She has nothing.
A little time later, a business owner stood up to ask Darling a question about what the State of Wisconsin is going to do to help him and people like him survive, especially in today's foundering economy. As Darling gave a typical "we need to do this" and "we need to do that" type of answer, the businessman confronted her on her record.
He asked her how long she's been in government (he actually had to ask twice to get the answer). When she told him since 1990, he said that she's been saying the "we need to" spiel for 18 years and wanted to know when she was going to finally start actually doing something.
The business owner then started to walk away in disgust. It was Wasserman who got him to stop and become engaged again. He did it simply by asking the man what help he was looking for, instead of doing like Darling and talking about all the non-actions she had taken.
In summary, Darling managed, in the course of less than two hours, twice dissed her base, got blasted on her lies on her record and Wasserman's record on taxes, was scolded for disrespecting her constituency, and was further scolded for not doing her job for 18 years. Not a good day for her at all.
In related news, Darling seems to subscribe to the political theory of "If you repeat a lie often enough, it becomes truth." JSOnline's All Politics blog points out that she is still trying to misrepresent the facts regarding their tax records.
Wasserman himself put it's best in a quote from the post:
"I signed a pledge in 2002 not to vote for any tax increases. Since signing the pledge I have not voted for a single tax increase. Senator Darling voted for 2005 Assembly Bill 58. She can call it whatever she wants, but attaching a catchy name won't hide the fact that the bill authorized increases in property tax levies across the state. ... The truth is that Senator Darling has a long record of supporting tax increases. If she had her way, drivers in Wisconsin would have paid an additional billion dollars in gas taxes over the last 13 years. Look it up. She voted for Senate Amendment 117 to 1995 Assembly Bill 150. She wanted to add a 3.2% oil franchise fee which would have increased the gas tax by 3.52 cents per gallon. I helped defeat that the amendment. It is a shame that the groups like Americans for Tax Reform have stopped fighting for taxpayers and become spokesmen for the Republican Party. Why else would they be attacking the only true fiscal conservative in the race? "
See how easy it is? All one has to do is offer proof to be credible. Darling still hasn't done that simple thing.
Watch the video for yourself, and you will see that Wasserman is the much more powerful, responsible and invested candidate. He is much more deserving to serve in the State Senate than Darling.
But being the helpful type of fellow that I am, I would offer her this link so that she can remain gainfully employed after she loses this election.
Posts
I think Wasserman has, in fact, forgotten the other clause in the Taxpayer Protection Pledge.
ReplyDeleteThe Pledge requires him to "oppose AND vote against any and all efforts to increase taxes." Simply voting against tax increases isn't enough. Check it out. Wasserman has repeatedly promised tax increases and sponsored bills that would increase taxes.
Those are violations of the promise he took to his constituents.
The actual language of the Pledge is below:
I, ____________, pledge to the taxpayers of the _____ district of the State of _________ and to all the people of this state, that I will oppose and vote against any and all efforts to increase taxes.
Well, I can see where he might have violated the word of the pledge, but not the spirit.
ReplyDeleteBut for the sake of argument, say he did violate it. Then Darling did as well, making that a wash. In all the other regards, he still has her beat.
doesn't that pledge depend a lot on what the interpretation of increasing taxes is? I think republicans tend to skip over the more in depth explanation of long term taxation and just focus on short term concepts......which has pretty much put us in this financial mess the whole world is facing right now.
ReplyDelete