.
Wednesday, August 23, 2006
A sporting gentleman's wager-and request for suggestions.
Former IDP state Chair, and noted Des Moines barrister, Gordon R. Fischer recently posted the following on Krusty Konservative.
"Gordon R. Fischer said...
The reason Krusty only posts about either (1) Jim Nussle or (2) the 2008 presidential race is that 2006 is shaping up to be a real butt kicking for the Iowa GOP. I mean, what else could KK really write about beside 1 or 2 above? KK himself has admitted the Iowa Senate is going Dem. The Iowa House will too; there is no real evidence Congressman Boswell is in any trouble; and all indications are that Bruce Braley is cruising to a win in our 1st Congressional District. KK writes about Nussle and presidentials because, well, what else can you write about as a member of the Iowa GOP?
8/23/2006 4:49 PM"
To paraphrase one of my leading movie idols, Rooster Cogburn, "bold words for a [four eyed bearded] man. Being a sporting gentleman myself, much like Dennis Quaid in "Wyatt Earp", I propose the following wager. If the Ds take Terrace Hill, CDs 1 and 3, and both houses of the legislature I will come to your office and serve you latte and croissants. You can invite Ken Munro and any others from your firm to watch.
If the forces of light and right (a/k/a the Iowa GOP) take any of the foregoing you need to come to my office and serve me tableside prime rib, with my much smaller firm, but particularly our Democrat associates, assembled as witnesses.
What say you?
Readers-feel free to suggest what kind of a spread a confident Democrat should offer a downtrodden Republican in our challenging times.
"Gordon R. Fischer said...
The reason Krusty only posts about either (1) Jim Nussle or (2) the 2008 presidential race is that 2006 is shaping up to be a real butt kicking for the Iowa GOP. I mean, what else could KK really write about beside 1 or 2 above? KK himself has admitted the Iowa Senate is going Dem. The Iowa House will too; there is no real evidence Congressman Boswell is in any trouble; and all indications are that Bruce Braley is cruising to a win in our 1st Congressional District. KK writes about Nussle and presidentials because, well, what else can you write about as a member of the Iowa GOP?
8/23/2006 4:49 PM"
To paraphrase one of my leading movie idols, Rooster Cogburn, "bold words for a [four eyed bearded] man. Being a sporting gentleman myself, much like Dennis Quaid in "Wyatt Earp", I propose the following wager. If the Ds take Terrace Hill, CDs 1 and 3, and both houses of the legislature I will come to your office and serve you latte and croissants. You can invite Ken Munro and any others from your firm to watch.
If the forces of light and right (a/k/a the Iowa GOP) take any of the foregoing you need to come to my office and serve me tableside prime rib, with my much smaller firm, but particularly our Democrat associates, assembled as witnesses.
What say you?
Readers-feel free to suggest what kind of a spread a confident Democrat should offer a downtrodden Republican in our challenging times.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
27 comments:
At last a blog for grownups. Thanks Ted. I appreciate your humor, mostly glad to see you keep your focus on issues. At this point in time there is really only one issue: Who can keep America safe from those who wish to destroy us? The answer is simple and deep down every American knows the answer - Republicans. When we truly focus on national security, the voters will come our way.
Ted, you should have bargained for more...that sounds like good odds for you.
War Sporer and Brandmeyer
The Democrats should hand over a pair of gold-plated scissors as a peace offering.
Based on Gordon's quote, I think that you should take the Governor's race out of the deal -- the quote seems to admit that as being a race Rebublicans can talk about.
Ted,
Don't include me in your nightmare vision of a Democratic takeover of the state. The thought of the Regressives in power would probably render me incapable of eating, or watching anyone else eat anyway.
Ken Munro
Screw GOPFest Ted,
I'd pay for tickets to this!
War Sporer
Gordon,
In or out, right now?
Lattes and croissants vs. prime rib? Ted, you are a cheapskate!
I think he's talking about a point spread there. Gordon is so sure that they are going to win everything and the R's are going to lose everything that Gordy (I don't answer questions) True Blue would be willing to offer greater odds. After all, he likely won't have to pay up.
If he's so sure, he'll be fine with prime rib. Perhaps Ted should have gotten higher odds than Prime Rib.
Ted, I've only got one question for you.
How do you like your prime rib?
Hey Teddy
I saw Gordo debating Mike Mahaffey last weekend on the Insiders on WHO TV. I saw you debate Jerry Crawford the week before. Does Jerry have a title with in the D circles or is he just the D Godfather? I don't know Mike Mahaffey but understand he was a party chair years ago.
How about more recent titleholders going at it? More fun and more topical.
When are they going to put the you and Gordo on at the same time.
It looks like he's constantly ducking you. Why is he afraid of you? I notice he's been hiding ALL day.
Or else, maybe he's researching that question he never answers - what are they going to do to be fiscally responsible?
I used to think it was just raising taxes. Now, I know it includes gambling my mother, the teacher, and my sister, the AFSCME member's retirement savings.
Mahaffey sucks...
WAR Sporer
I like Mike Mahaffey
Probably a nice guy, just but he sucks when it comes to charging forward with the GOP.
Didn't he agree with Gordon like 3 times?
We need Spoerer vs. Gordon.
War the battle of the Goatee
If Sporer can put the smack down on Crawford Gordon or Tom Henderson wouldn't be much opposition for him.
Like Hawkeyes vs. City High Little Hawkeyes.
WAR City High
I notice that Sporer answers questions. Actually seems to seek out someone to question him so he can answer.
How come Gordon won't answer any questions?
I notice that Sporer answers questions. Actually seems to seek out someone to question him so he can answer.
How come Gordon won't answer any questions?
Hey sporer
Gordon is blaming Terry Branstad for CIETC. How about that for some spin? Looks to me like they know how bad the situation is and are just trying to make it look like the Republicans FORCED the Democrats too be corrupt. We made them take the money.
Boy, he really can't be that good of a lawyer if he really thinks that one is going to fly.
Why isn't Sporer Nussle's spokesman. Chet would be 100 pounds lighter after Ted chewed his ass off.
WAR Sporer!
Sporer: Gordo wasn't talking smack about the gubernatorial race yet you added that into your wager. However, CD 1 & 3 ARE lost causes for the lunatic right as are both Houses of the Iowa legislature. Nice work W (with special thanks to your cozy crony Mr. Nussle whose role shouldn't be understated and who could very well lose his race to a political lightweight)--and thanks for bringing Iowa and America back to their collective senses by showing what 21st century Republican conservatism is really all about: dim-witted saber-rattling, dangerous militarism carried out by chickenhawk cowards willing to send other people's sons and daughters to places they used their family influence to avoid, pandering to fanatics on the religious right, corporate cronyism and tax policy that advantages only America's super-rich. It never fails to amaze me how those reading this blog have come to believe that W and today's Republican party actually works for them. Karl Rove truly is an evil genious. Enjoy the slow walk to November:)
anon 2:47,
is that you Gordon?
Anon 2:47
I won't answer most of your childish name calling rant, but I will point out that Republican families serve in the armed forces at a much much higher rate that do Democrat families.
You demonstrate my point that the liberal left has nothing but hysteria and ad hominym.
Not many Democrats serving in the military in Iraq that is for sure!
Sporer: I'm so, so sorry about my "childish, name-calling rant." Maybe someday you'll explain why it was childish and a rant. Was it because I didn't cite any sources for my claims? I guess I'm a bit confused since in a previous post you chided an intelligent observer who asked you to cite your source for a lie you made up about Culver's IPERS investment plan as "stuck in the world of high school debate standards". You never did cite the source. I've noticed that anything critical of your idiot president that gets posted here is always "childish" or "ad hominym" regardless of how well developed the argument is. Why is that? Not wanting to lower the obviously high standards that exist on this blog ("WAR SPORER--RA,RA,RA") I'll do my best to be more specific. Let's begin with my charge of "dim-witted saber-rattling." I'll cite the idiot himself here(by the way I'm using "idiot" here because none less then the beloved Joe Scarborough himself devoted most of a recent program to this issue) who recently admitted that his "bring it on" and "wanted dead or alive" comments shortly after 9-11 were mistakes that "set back" the war on terror. Regarding "chickenhawk cowards willing to send other people's sons and daughters to places they used their family influence to avoid" I think big Dick's 5 deferments and W's jumping to the top of the Texas Guard waiting list to gain entry into the "Champaigne Unit", performing a vanishing act in Alabama where no one remembers seeing him for a year and a half on base, and serving hazardous duty dating Tricia Nixon while supposedly serving in Alabama would certainly qualify. I won't even bring up Paul Wolfowicz's deferments or Rummy's miraculous ability to miss combat despite being active during both Korea and Vietnam. Now, as to "pandering to fanatics on the religious right", the unnamed Bush friend quoted in a recent Newsweek as saying that W "doesn't give a shit about gay marriage" doesn't cut mustard on an intellectual blog like this one since it's anonymous and it is Newsweek afterall. However, I'll throw out W's statement during the 1994 gubernatorial campaign in Texas that Jews couldn't get into heaven because they don't accept Jesus Christ as a good example. The South Carolina religious smear of McCain would also qualify. It is now known that both of these were straight from the desk of Karl Rove--probably why they were so successful. Now, as to corporate cronyism, Kenny Boy (rest his soul) was W's largest lifetime campaign contributor at over $700,000 and W was flown around on Kenny Boy's personal jet during Texas gubernatorial campaigns and his campaign for president. As I recall, Enron was up to some pretty illegal shit during those flights. One Republican source said: "most of the Washington press corps has been content to leave alone the much larger story—the apparent seventeen-year connection between the Bush dynasty and Enron. Even without such information, it seems clear, counting campaign contributions, consultancies, joint investments, deals, presidential library and inaugural contributions, speech fees and the like, that the Bush family and entourage collected some $8 million to $10 million from Enron over the years, which is more than changed hands in Harding's Teapot Dome scandal. Depending on some still-unclear relationships, it could be as high as $25 million." Illegal? I don't know. An incredible coincidence? Definately. More fishy smelling than a cheerleaders locker room? Without a doubt, but don't waste time thinking about something like that when you can rage on about Clinton's Travelgate or sexual dalliances. Finally, "tax policy that advantages only America's super-rich" is handled quite well by Pulitzer Prize winning author David Cay Johnson's book "Perfectly Legal: The Covert Campaign to Rig Our Tax System to Benefit the Super Rich and Cheat Everybody Else". Now he won his Pulitzer while writing for the New York Times so I'm sure that disqualifies him on this blog so I'll just go with the 2005 CBO study which concluded that "...from 2001-2004 when the federal income tax burden on Americans rose by 18 percent, it fell by 16 percent for the wealthiest 400 Americans who saw their income soar." Now go ahead and talk about how long a post this is (blah, blah, blah) and how I'm ranting (blah, blah, blah), and how ad hominym is the first tactic of the uninformed (blah, blah, blah) and how I should go back to the democratic blogs (blah, blah, blah) but whatever you do, don't let the facts stand in the way of defending YOUR PRESIDENT. WAR SPORER--ugh, ugh, ugh, RA!!!
Anon 2:47
My President is extremely popular among those that are fighting and dying to defend your ability to endlessly rant.
President Bush and the SecDef can truly cut the muster and those that can't.....rant! Yet, I notice the left's only plan is to not have a plan. Just blame everything on President Bush and hope for the best. I think the "Cut and Run" strategy is too kind as the Democrat answer is closer to "Stick your head in the sand and hope for the best." As to the charge they avoided duty; it doesn't seem to bother the vast majority of the soldiers in Iraq.
The Democrats continue to fight the last war and something tells me that if Al Gore had been the President he would have apologized for the big buildings in the way of the hijacked airliners rather than take out the Taliban.
Pussy Gordon still hasn't accepted.
Post a Comment