Sex, Lies, and Harry Reid

Did Harry Reid vote to give sex offenders Viagra at taxpayers expense? No.

In fact, Reid didn’t do that. The bill in question was not a bill at all. It was an amendment offered by Sen. Tom Coburn (R-Okla.) in an effort to trip up health care reform. The Oklahoma Republican introduced the most politically palatable, non-objectionable piece of legislation in hopes that Democrats would relent, pass it, and change the content of the health care law they were hoping to pass through reconciliation. If Democrats didn’t bite, the GOP would have ammo for the type of attack ad that Angle has now aired. Only the Nevada Republican got the details wrong. Coburn’s amendment didn’t provide taxpayer funds for Viagra; it prevented sexual predators from being able to use government subsidies or money to buy the drug (and other ED pills).

So, when Sharron Angle says Harry Reid voted to give taxpayer funds to sexual predators she is deliberately misrepresenting his vote. Her assertion is a flat out lie.  Voting against a bill that contains a language that prohibits such a thing is not the same as voting for a bill that endorses it. 

In fact, lying about Harry Reid is about all that Sharron Angle can do. As I wrote the other day, “She’s quite adept at flinging lies, much like a gorilla flings poo (her commercials are merely video versions of the wildest-eyed conspiracy-laden emails that I’ve received from rightwing nutcases over the last several years). . .”

Every single Sharron Angle ad bashes Harry Reid. Not a single one of her ads talks about her record or what she would do when she gets to the Senate.* Perhaps that is because she has no plan and because her record is exactly what Bill Raggio (R), Minority Leader of the Nevada Senate says it is.

“What is difficult to overlook is her record of being totally ineffective as a four-term assemblywomen, her inability or unwillingness to work with others, even within her own party, and her extreme positions on issues such as Medicare, social security, education, veterans affairs and many others . . . ”

There is absolutely nothing in Sharron Angle’s record or stance on issues that I find appealing or redeeming. Sharron Angle is the antithesis of everything I stand for and believe in.

Ya know, Sweetie is husband number two. When I was married to husband number one, I was not a happy camper. My answer was to try to make things better and when  it became clear that I couldn’t, I ended the marriage and made a life for myself and my daughter. What I didn’t do was dump him for someone far more abusive and irresponsible.  Unlike a divorce, when it comes to the U.S. Senate, rejecting Reid at the polls doesn’t give us a breather. Rejecting Harry Reid automatically gets us Sharron Angle. Choosing None Of These Candidates doesn’t give us a do-over, nor does it leave the seat vacant until we can find a more palatable choice. So, no. I’m not going to jump from the frying pan into the fire. And the race is too close to sit this one out. As much as he has disappointed me in the past, Harry will get my tepid support when I go to cast my ballot. 

I realize that by my vote I am contributing to the problem of Ignore-The-Base Democrats, and that these same Democrats will  likely misread the results of this election, but Angle is a bridge too far. I just can’t do anything that would contribute to her victory.

*Brian Sandoval has basically adopted this same tactic in his race against Rory Reid. What’s your plan, Brian? In the debate last Thursday night, Brian Sandoval consistently bashed Rory’s budget plan but to date has not yet put out one of his own, leaving every single Nevada voter guessing a week before early vote starts. I’ll be voting for Rory Reid for a variety of reasons and while I do still have misgivings/questions about portions of his education plan,  I cannot ignore his attention to the issues, nor his courage in putting forth detailed plans for getting our state’s economy back on track, tackling our rock-bottom education system, harnessing our state’s plethora of natural energy sources, and fixing our budget woes.

Chickens coming home to roost

The Queen of “No” gets a “no” from Bill Raggio.

“What is difficult to overlook is her record of being totally ineffective as a four-term assemblywomen, her inability or unwillingness to work with others, even within her own party, and her extreme positions on issues such as Medicare, social security, education, veterans affairs and many others,” Raggio said in a prepared statement.

Dribs and Drabs

That’s about all I can muster right now. I’m lurking around the blogosphere, but mostly still just catching my breath and tying up loose ends from the past weeks.

I’ll be back soon.

Reid the Younger and Reid the Elder will be squaring off against their Republican opponents a week apart.

I’ll be watching the Rory Reid/Brian Sandoval debate tomorrow night, and then of course, next week there will be the one and only Harry Reid/Sharron Angle debate a scant two days before Early Vote starts. She’s quite adept at flinging lies, much like a gorilla flings poo (her commercials are merely video versions of the wildest-eyed conspiracy-laden emails that I’ve received from rightwing nutcases over the last several years), but how will she handle a face-to-face debate? I just hope the moderators call her on her shit. We shall see. Yeah, Harry has pissed me off plenty, but there is nothing Sharron Angle offers Nevada. Nothing.

I’m wearing purple on the 20th. Spread the message, won’t you?

Oh, and we’ve gotten some news, family-wise, that’s set us a bit back on our heels. So there’s that.

So, it’s not her job to create jobs, but shouldn’t she at least know what legislation has passed and what hasn’t?

And if you can figure out this word fog you’re better than me.  The question was straightfoward: “What do you think about campaign finance regulations?”

Angle: Well I think that the Supreme Court has really made their decision on this, they found that we have a First Amendment right across the board that was violated by the McCain-Feingold Act. And that’s what they threw out, was those violations. The McCain-Feingold Act is still in place. The DISCLOSE Act is still in place. It’s just that certain provisions within that they found to be definitely violating the First Amendment. If we didn’t have the DISCLOSE Act there would be a lot of different things that people wouldn’t be able to find out. And certainly you can go to FEC.gov and see where Harry Reid is getting most of his money from special interests.

 So is she for campaign finance regulations or not?

And no, the DISCLOSE Act isn’t law. Senate Republicans “filibustered” it.

Note to Sharron Angle: Correlation does not equal causation

Hey Sharron, while I’m not always one of Harry Reid’s biggest fans, I really, really have a serious problem with you and your faulty logic in your latest campaign ad. I’m all about logic and facts, and you don’t seem to have a handle on either. Your ad states that since Harry Reid has become Majority Leader unemployment in Nevada has skyrocketed, implies that our dismal unemployment numbers are related to or caused by Harry being Majority Leader,  and that you’re here to save the day for all those unemployed Nevadans.

Alrighty then. Maven notes that the video is “Filled with red herrings, but gut wrenching all the same. Reaches right into the hearts of the true believer – out of work and doesn’t have a clue why other than what Rush tells him/her . . .”

I have to disagree with Maven a bit, even though I do worship at her feet. The logical fallacy employed here isn’t a Red Herring:

A Red Herring is a fallacy in which an irrelevant topic is presented in order to divert attention from the original issue. The basic idea is to “win” an argument by leading attention away from the argument and to another topic.

I can see why she thinks this because much of our problems today can be laid directly at the feet of failed Republican policies. However, I’m thinking the error in logic lies more along the lines of Post Hoc (Also Known as: Post Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc, False Cause, Questionable Cause, Confusing Coincidental Relationships With Causes)

The Post Hoc fallacy derives its name from the Latin phrase “Post hoc, ergo prop ter hoc.” This has been traditionally interpreted as “After this, therefore because of this.” This fallacy is committed when it is concluded that one event causes another simply because the proposed cause occurred before the proposed effect. More formally, the fallacy involves concluding that A causes or caused B because A occurs before B and there is not sufficient evidence to actually warrant such a claim.

When Harry Reid became Majority Leader Nevada’s unemployment was only 4.4%

Harry Reid became Majority Leader in January 2007.  According to this chart, in January 2007 the unemployment rate was 5.1%. By April it had dropped to 4.2%. And in between January 2007 and April 2008, Nevada’s unemployment rate danced between 5.1% and 4.2%, ending at 5.3% in December. That 4.4% Angle refers to happened in April and in May the rate dropped even more to 4.2%. In January 2008, unemployment jumped to 6% then dropped off again to 5.2% by April 2008.  And it’s right about May 2008 you see Nevada’s unemployment rate begin its inexorable climb, just like the rest of the country. While you’re looking at the chart, be sure to check the boxes to the left, specifically All of U.S. and Michigan, since Angle makes a point of comparing Nevada to Michigan in her ad.

“In just three years, Nevada’s economy has fallen from one of the strongest performing to possibly the weakest” Bill Anderson, Chief Economist, Nevada Employment Agency.

This is true. But again, correlation does not equal causation.  I wonder what happened that might have had such a drastic impact on Nevada’s unemployment rate? Was it Harry Reid?

Nevada had, up to that point, been growing faster than any other state in the union; requiring houses and schools for its ever-expanding population.  Housing prices sky-rocketed, jobs were plentiful, and home ownership was going through the roof thanks to sub-prime mortgages. But by 2007, the boom was starting to fade.

And then the recession, which “officially”  began in December 2007, stopped everything dead in its tracks. As people across the country began to tighten their collective belts, visitors stopped vacationing out of town, companies cut back everything: travel, conventions, off-site meetings, etc, and Nevada, long dependent on tourism dollars took another hit. Add the financial crisis of late 2008, and damn, Nevada (and the rest of the country) was in for a miserable time. Housing prices plummeted and people were laid off. My company alone had three lay-offs in 2009. And now we’re looking at huge budget cuts in this state because not one of our politicians has the guts to do what needs to be done (and I don’t mean slash and burn), but I digress.

Sharron leaves this part out of Anderson’s statement:

Anderson said this recession affects three key areas: residential construction, commercial development and commercial spending — sectors critical to Nevada’s economy.

When all you’ve got is tourism (spending) and construction (residential and commercial) …

 And for the first time ever, Nevada showed negative domestic migration into the state.

Clearly a poster child for the foreclosure crises, Florida was not the only state that shed its mid decade growth image. Stunningly Nevada also showed a net domestic migration loss in 2008-9 while Arizona gained only 15,000 migrants compared with 132,000 in 2004-5.

Since Harry Reid has become Majority Leader, 135,000 more Nevadans are unemployed. – U.S. Deparment of Labor

The U.S. Department of Labor is blaming that on Harry?

The fact that  the subprime mortgage crisis, the recession, and the financial crisis all happened at the same time that Harry Reid was Majority Leader, and therefore he is solely to blame (which is what your ad implies)  is as ridiculous as saying roosters crowing causes the sun to rise.

Help is on the way.

From who? YOU?  But I thought you said it isn’t a U.S. Senator’s job to create jobs.

As a U.S. Senator I’m not in the business of creating jobs.  … That’s not my job to bring industry to this state. That’s the Lieutenant Governor’s job. That’s your state senators’ and assemblymen’s job. That’s your Secretary of State’s job to make a climate here in the state that says, y’all come.

If creating jobs would not be your job (should we have the misfortune of electing you), why does your tortured logic lay our unemployment numbers at Harry’s feet? You yourself said we should be expecting our state government to grow jobs, and I’ve got no problem doing that.  I am more than happy to hold our state and local leaders responsible for much of our economic woes. Putting all our economic eggs in construction, tourism and gaming has been a disaster.

That being said, you don’t get to give yourself a Get Out Of Jail Free card, and then turn around and say Harry should have done what you so clearly believe is “not a U.S. Senator’s job.”

Sauce for the goose, and all that.

Just a reminder – UPDATE

Sharron Angle supports Prop 13-type initiatives. She makes Jim Gibbons look like a socialist.

So, when Bob Beers starts making noise about TASC (TABOR under a new name) and Sharron Angle pushes for a Nevada version of Proposition 13, remember Colorado. Do you really want underfunded schools? No libraries? No rural health programs? Police and fire departments operating on a shoestring? Roads that cannot handle the traffic of expanding communities?

UPDATE: For a great rundown on Ms. Angle and her ilk, check out Maven.

Here’s what Douglas J. Amy, Professor of Politics at Mount Holyoke College has to say about the ‘us’ vs ‘them’ mentality that Sharron Angle promotes:

For anti-government advocates this is a crucial distinction. They don’t want people seeing government as “we.” In terms of taxes, they want people to see the government as “them” taking money from “us.” It is this same rhetorical point that President George W. Bush expressed when he was pushing for one of his tax refunds: “It is not the government’s money,” he said. “It is your money.” But isn’t the government’s money in a very real sense “our” money too? Aren’t government programs “our” programs? Al Gore, when he was running for president, certainly thought so. Responding to Bush’s tax cut proposals, he argued: “Their theory is that’s going to be good for the country, and they say it’s your money. Well, it is your money. But it’s your Medicare, it’s your Social Security, it’s your environment, it’s your school system, it’s your country.”

Bingo. Now, can the rest of the Democrats start talking like this?

Nevada races I watched…

Well, such is the nature of Nevada politics that on the Rep side, the GOP nominated the most wild-eyed winger of them all to face Harry Reid in November, and on the Dem side, a great woman was nominated to run against the current Republican Lt. Governor (eat your heart out MZ).

Harry, I hope you are paying attention. 25% of your party did not support you in yesterday’s primary. Hell, more than 10% chose None of the Above. In the primary! And Harry, the answer is NOT to tack further to the right, got that? I’m sure you’d like to think that the Tea Party just clinched your re-election, but as radical as Sharron Angle is, I put nothing past the Nevada electorate. Nothing. Start talking some populist smack and really back your words up with action in the Senate, or you may be retiring to Searchlight come November.

In the NV-02 race (no Dem has ever won that district) an activist Democratic woman appears to have pulled it off against her RINO opponent. The third person in the race is a local crank, and surprisingly, he got 10% of the vote. Sam Dehne is certifiable. And he got 10%. The NV-02 Dem primary was a nail biter all night, and when I went to be the RINO had jumped ahead. This morning, it’s Nancy Price in the lead. I assume the closeness of the vote will trigger an automatic recount. Under 1% and it is supposed to happen. I don’t know if the absentees have been counted yet.

Joy of joys, Jim Gibbons went down to humiliating defeat. Doing the happy dance. Brian Sandoval (R) will face Rory Reid (D) in the general. While I support Rory, Brian Sandoval is not the wild-eyed radical the shadow group Don’t Bet on Sandoval makes him out to be. Jeebus on a triscuit, I keep getting their emails which allow me no way to “opt out” – nor is there any way to contact them via their web site. Rory needs to publicly distance himself from this group, but my pleas have fallen on deaf ears. If Brian wins, I won’t be as crushed as I was when the empty suit, the Man With No Plan, Jim Gibbons, whose re-election campaign motto was He kept his promise, beat out Dina Titus in 2006.

Locally, it appears that our Lyon County Sheriff, Allen Veil, will not have to face an opponent in the General Election. With 53.6% of the vote in a non-partisan race, he has been re-elected. Good.