I guess they didn't "provide" you w/a breakdown...
Owen Shackelford, executive director of Oklahoma State Senate Democrats, responded, "I find it interesting that while Senator Coffee questioned the legitimacy of the polling data released by the Tulsa World, he didn't question the truthfulness of the ads being aired by the DLCC. I guess he's conceded that what they say is correct.
"Glenn Coffee, Ernest Istook, and Todd Hiett are on the same sinking ship, and they'll do or say anything at this point to try and save themselves."
Only someone from the political party that doesn't know what the definition of "is" is could say Coffee has not questioned the truthfulness of the DLCC's attack ads.
In this very post, Coffee said the ads "falsely attack" Brian Bingman's character.
Yesterday he put out a news release calling the ads "deceptive and misleading."
Shackelford is spinning, as usual.
Spinning is right! How interesting that Owen Shakelford did not dispute what Coffee said about the polling: Republicans have the momentum in the key Senate races.
Let's see, here is the track record for the Senate Democrats campaign people since 2000:
2000: Dems lost three seats.
2002: Dems lost three of their seats, but managed to knock off a Repub incumbent in a fluke.
2004: Dems lost two seats, and almost lost two more.
2006 Special Election: The Dems internal polls showed Democrat Robbie Kerr comfortably ahead. They were so confident of victory, Dem leaders flew on a trial lawyer jet to the Dems Altus watch party. They were shocked when Republican Mike Schulz won the race by 16 points. "But what about our polling?"
Democrats have lost 9 of their seats since 2000, while winning only 1 Republican seat.
Okay. So I guess that is settled. This website does not convey political "news" in a non-partisan fashion. It is a branch of the far right-wing kool-aide drinkers who wish to consolidate wealth and power into the hands of the few and thanks to amen sections such as this, cloaked partisan hacksite, want the dissappearance of the middle class and for them to look forward to the trip.
Let's start with Brian Bingman, or as you so cleverly referred to him as "Brain" in your article that announced his opponent as a "power hungry trial attorney" around thirty seven times.
Acording to the Sapulpa Daily Herald:
"The state Senate is the biggest obstacle in our fight for meaningful workers compensation reform, tort reform, reduced income taxes, elimination of the estate tax and better schools," he said.
1)Meaningful workers compensation reform.
a)definition:
If you get your hand tore off you're fired. His campaign supporters have no room for one handed employees. This is a subset of the Bush doctrine of "ownership society". In other words, you're on your own.
2)Tort reform
a) definition
When my campaign supporters foist a defective product upon you, causing your hand to get tore off, it is your own stupid fault for buying the defective product. Again, you are on your own because the only group Republicans want to regulate are lawyers who defend people and hold our supporters responsible.
3)Reduced income taxes [and the] elimination of the estate tax.
a)definition:
The 7,200 families that make up the bulk of the Republican paymasters are the only ones that would benefit from the elimination of the "Paris Hilton tax". Everyone else's income tax would get reduced by $6 which would be gobbled up by the next big pharma medical bill Republicans let them write in order to lighten their 3 day work week load so they can golf with the likes of Abramoff and Safavian and Ney and Cunningham and Delay and swells such as this.
I would take on the rest in your heavily stilted and biased article, but I know how tired you must be from standing diligently on your hindquarters in some corner, panting expectantly for some rich swell to toss you a cocktail weenie. How sad to be a prostitute for such a pack of rightards raised on the wingnut welfare circuit, that you beg for scraps in the hope of licking the fingers dislodged briefly from their spelunking duties into orifices of their corporate paymasters.
"I would take on the rest in your heavily stilted and biased article, but I know how tired you must be from standing diligently on your hindquarters in some corner, panting expectantly for some rich swell to toss you a cocktail weenie. How sad to be a prostitute for such a pack of rightards raised on the wingnut welfare circuit, that you beg for scraps in the hope of licking the fingers dislodged briefly from their spelunking duties into orifices of their corporate paymasters."
Wow! Quite a few adjectives in this response my friend. Please visit often.
Commenting by HaloScan
