Shame on Sherrod Brown!
Update: Just watched the 10pm. replay. Someone should tell Sherrod Brown that he can filibuster only when and IF he gets elected to the US Senate.
Shame on Sherrod Brown! Shame on Sherrod Brown for reciting the talking points of the Manhattan and Washington DC elite liberals with no consideration for the needs of Ohio. Shame on Sherrod Brown for wasting our time rehearsing Nutty Ned’s lines for an Ohio election.
When Ohio voters realize that Ned Lamont’s clone is running in Ohio, they will turn out in droves to defeat him. And believe me; defeating Brown is a nobler goal than electing Dewine.
Today’s telecast of Meet the Press was the occasion for a debate between Senator Mike Dewine and Congressman Sherrod Brown. Although Ohio is a state that is firmly red, Dewine has lost credibility with republican voters in Ohio by attempting to be too much like John McCain. It’s also not a good year for any republican in Ohio due the scandal surrounding Governor Bob Taft, and his unimpressive performance in office. In a normal year, Dewine would have no trouble trouncing Brown.
The release of two critical polls demonstrates that the race is too close to call, a polling phenomena that mirrors polling in the 2000 and 2004 Presidential elections the first week of October. While these polls often fail to acknowledge in any reasonable manner the red state nature of Ohio’s voting patterns, the senate race is undoubtedly close, and could fall in Brown’s favor between now and November 7.
Today’s debate brought shame onto Sherrod Brown because Mr. Brown choose to kick the debate off with the contrived talking points of the Washington liberals while ignoring the particular interests and complexion of the Ohio voter. In his first response to arch leftist and former democrat party operative Tim Russert, Brown cited the new book by Bob Woodward as if this headline grabbing, sensationalist tabloid trash were a source worthy of reference.
Brown parroted the line coming from the “old grey lady” faster than Pete Rose denied betting on baseball.
CONGRESSMAN BROWN: “First it’s a question of accountability and a question of competence. Every—we all know, everyone knows now, the book that just mentioned by Bob Woodward, “State of Denial,” the book, “Fiasco,” the new National Intelligence estimates all say that, that the administration, that particularly Cheney and Rumsfeld, either muzzled or ignored—muzzled the military, muzzled the intelligence or, or ignored their advice.”
Furthermore, Brown sounded like a hog on ice when questioned about voting against the $87 billion dollars and voted five times against funding body armor for our troops. Like John Kerry when the Swift Boat veterans outed him, Russert and Dewine grilled the congressman and Brown flipped and flopped.
MR. RUSSERT: You—if you had your way, you had suggested the troops be out this year, by the fall of ‘06. What would’ve happened to Iraq if the troops were leaving right now?
CONGRESSMAN BROWN: No, I, I suggested—I didn’t suggest that.
It seems that Mr. Brown just told his biggest whopper to Tim Russert. Read this quote from December 4, 2005: “We can’t pull out tomorrow. I voted against the Iraq war initially, I voted against the $87 billion at the beginning of the war to fund the war, I spoke out against the war consistently. I have a resolution right now that requires the President to submit to the American public and to Congress an exit strategy at the end of this year, and next year beginning the troop withdrawal – a safe, orderly troop withdrawal – by October, 2006.”
Shame on you, Sherrod Brown, for lying to Tim Russert today. It makes Mr. DeWine’s next statement ring with truth.
SEN DEWINE: You are absolutely unbelievable. How can you say this when you, Sherrod, voted five different times against funding for body armor when it really counted, when it was real money? You voted five times against body armor. And this is a long pattern, Tim, that this congressman has, with all due respect. Fifteen different times he has voted against funding for the military when it really counted in the, in the final vote. But it’s a long history, a long pattern.
In addition, Sherrod Brown refused to take responsibility today for his votes against funding the military, and for his repeated votes against all aspects of the Patriot Act. Sherrod Brown simply cannot be believed. Even a weakened Dewine was able to take Brown to task for his barefaced performance and inexplicable positions.
SEN. DEWINE: The majority of times of those 10 times where Sherrod Brown voted to cut our intelligence spending, he was the minority even of his own party. In addition to that, Tim, we passed the Patriot Act. We all came together, passed it, 98-to-1 in the Senate. That means Ted Kennedy voted for it, John Kerry voted for it. Sherrod Brown in the House, was one of 66 members of the House to vote against the Patriot Act, and he continues to vote against the Patriot Act, to deny our law enforcement the tools they need to go against terror.
Congressman Brown spent a good deal of time slandering Mike Dewine and trying to make Dewine guilty by association when Brown knows DeWine’s integrity beginning in 1976 as the Greene County Prosecutor.
Furthermore, Ohio can not settle for a politician who does nothing better than parrot the Treason Times, echo Bob Woodward, or impersonate Ned Lamont. Ohio demands authenticity, honesty, and integrity from its senators, and Ohio is still more of a red state than a blue one. Election day will demonstrate the veracity of Ohio’s conservative voters.
Sherrod Brown on War and Peace, The Washington Examiner, Meet The Depressed Transcript, Real Clear Politics Ohio Senate,
16 Comments »
Leave a comment
-
Flickr Photos
More Photos
The funny thing about this race is the fact that Brown’s only chance of winning is if the electorate doesn’t get to know him by election day. I’m sure there are many good folks who have various reasons not to be motivated to take the time to vote for DeWine. However, if they get to know Brown they will understand the need to vote. A vote for Brown (or not voting at all) is not just a vote for one goofy leftist it is also a vote for Harry Reid to be majority leader. A vote for Brown would be another vote against conservative judges. A vote for Brown is a vote for capitulization in the war on terror.
I read the transcript before I finiished reading your post, and I was screaming at my computer when Brown denied that he had suggested that our troops be out of Iraq by 10/06.
Excellent catch. That should be Mike DeWine’s TV ad rotation for the rest of the campaign.
DeWine did a pretty good job in the Russert debate. Brown is obviously a guy who wants to hog the time and will keep on talking no matter how many times he is told to rein it in.
I meant “in” DeWine’s TV ad rotation, not that it should be the whole thing.
As much of a conservative as I am, I have to admit that DeWine’s “let’s stop the bickering” approach will appeal to moderates. The key question is whether conservatives will turn out for him. I would say for the most part, based on today’s performance, the answer will be “yes.”
I have loaded the transcript onto my web site for future ref (apostrophes look bad, but otherwise OK):
http://www.bizzyblog.com/MTPressDewineBrown100106.html
[...] He’s not happy with Sherrod Brown. He is correct not to be, especially over the lie about not saying that he wanted troops out of Iraq by October 2006 last year. [...]
Pingback by Bizzyblog » Thespis on the MTP DeWine-Brown Debate | October 2, 2006 |
I’m sorry, where did he lie here? It seems like the “shame on you” should be directed at YOU.
He never said he didn’t say he planned for troops to be out by the Fall of 2006. Russert phrased the question poorly, implying that he said it in the PRESENT, that he wanted the troops out in the Fall of 2006 (when he said it a year ago).
How can you sleep with yourself when you post such a misleading quote WITHOUT THE REST OF THE QUOTE.
“I didn’t suggest that, ” Brown said, and then said something inaudible as he was cut off by Russert that sounds like “today.” Then he churned the wheels in his head to figure out what Russert was was trying to hit him with. He then proceeds to clarify, with a “you’re-talking-about-that” look on his face:
“I suggested A YEAR AGO that the president come up with a plan to begin the exist – the withdrawal – of troops and that it be within a year or so…I’ve never said ‘bring them out today.’”
Furthermore, it seems if anyone lied here it was DeWine distorting Brown’s voting record regarding body armor. What is the “history” of voting against it that DeWine speaks of?
Brown has a long and documented history of PUSHING for supplies and resources to support troops (both in voting record and in action).
DeWine cited the $87 billion. When are people going to take the time to educate themselves on that issue – it was a suspect proposal that was amended and changed (multiple votes involved). That’s why so many people who supported the initial incentive/amendment turned around and voted against the final product. It’s not called flip-flopping. It’s not called being against the troops. It’s called intelligence, and standing up and saying “I will not support this bill which doesn’t accomplish what we set out for it to accomplish.
Are there other examples?
Sherrod Brown has repeatedly misrepresented his view on Iraq. He tried to tell Russert that he NEVER wanted the troops out by October 2006. Where would the US be if the troops were out right now? Al Qaeda fights in Iraq, and they agree with Sherrod Brown-pull out now. Brown has repeatedly sided with the terrorists.
Congressman Brown is an embarrassment and is nothing more than a carbon copy of Nutty Ned Lamont!
Wake up Ohio!
Vote Dewine for Senate.
First of all, do you have an AEI IV in your arm?
Yes Brown is a terrorist. Good logic. No, Great logic. Obviously what the hell were we talking about. Why even write about this stuff in a blog? It’s so obvious he is a terrorist. *End sarcasm* Nice ad hominen point.
Thespis, he absolutely did not tell Brown that – did you read my previous post? It seems you conveniently ignored it. Have you even seen his interview with Russert or are you just reading some transcript?
When has he misrepresented his view on Iraq?
It’s ironic that you tell Ohio to “wake up” but you seem to enjoy living in a state of benightedness yourself.
We watched the interview and read the transcript.
I know it is very uncomfortable for the liberals, but they do regularly agree with Al Qaeda. This is not ad hominam. It is a an uncomfortable fact. As Ronald Reagan said, “facts are stubborn things.”
The fact that liberals share the views of the terrorists should be a clue to the total idiocy of the view. Yet, these liberals are clueless. Lamont, Murtha, and Brown would make quite a team in Wahsington.
Again, you completely – as you say, uncomfortably – ignore all of my points and questions.
Are you going to ever address these points or just keep ignoring them and hope they go away?
And please share, when do the liberals agree with Al Qaeda? What common points do they share? It is ad hominem when you can’t explain any of these statements with these “facts” you speak of.
Liberal Democrats (Sherrod Brown) and Al Qaeda agree on the following:
The troops should be pulled out of Iraq immediately and be redeployed to Okinawa.
President Bush is the focus of evil in the modern world.
The United States is the “bully” of the world.
The US supports Israel too strongly.
George Bush should have one-on-one talks with North Korea.
Iran should have nuclear weapons.
North Korea should have nuclear weapons.
The United Nations should determine US policy.
Hezbollah is simply misunderstood.
Any more questions?
I forgot to mention that both the terrorists and the liberals “blame America first” for all of the world’s problems.
Those are all sweeping and republican talking points that aren’t so simple.
*Most of the world – including a majority of Americans – want the troops pulled out of Iraq. It does not make them terrorists, regardless of whether a certain terrorism group desires the same result. Hitler loved Wagner. People who love Wagner aren’t Hitler. It’s really simple…
And Sherrod Brown does not want them pulled out today – does it give you some type of satisfaction to continue to lie to yourself and anyone reading your blog about Brown’s position?
*On President Bush – he’s had more people march in protest against him than any human being in the history of Earth.
*The US *IS* the bully of the world – that’s just an International Relations analysis. They are the world hegemon right now. They spend more money than the rest of the world combined on their military (not including cost of wars).
*On Israel, again, the US adpots their position for many reasons. Regardless of whether they are just or not, do you not even see your own hypocrisy? You get mad at Democrats for saying the US shouldn’t have a foreign policy determined by the tiny nation of Israel, but you imply it’s reprehensible for the United Nations to determine foreign policy!
*Again, a lot of people around the world think Bush should talk to North Korea, and his handling of them has been downright diasterous from all points of view.
*Who thinks Iran or N. Korean should have nuclear weapons? Are you making this up? Source please.
*Hezbollah is misunderstood? SO? You mean someone around the world is suggesting that certain media engines portray groups labelled as “terrorists” in negative light and others counter that it isn’t so black and white? Is that your claim? What’s the point here?
*Finally, if you want to mention the world’s problems, then why don’t you mention how many people around the ENTIRE WORLD “blame America first?” I suppose they are all terrorists too?
It’s not so black and white. Many people internationally blame America – the world’s unchecked hegemon – as the cause of many international problems that are, well, related to America! Who would you blame?
Many Americans, and most liberals, blame this American ADMINISTRATION, not the country entirely, for many domestic problems in the last 6 years and a few international disasters.
Do you see how none of these have anything to do with Democrats = terrorists?
And you continue to ignore my original points.
I am thrilled that the rantings of BTaylor. noted moonbat, are posted here for all to read.
Yes, many people worldwide blame America for everything. Too bad some of our citizens, so much better informed, agree with them.
I am proud to say that the terrorists do not agree with President Bush on any points. You can dismiss it as talking points, but the points remain.
You’re right, Sherrod Brown wanted the troops out already. He is Murtha cut and run all the way.
Wake up Ohio.
If you’re thrilled by my “rantings,” then alert your readers to this thread. All it does is illustrate the lies, propaganda, and baseless allegations you spread on this blog.
And now that you have failed to answer any of my questions, ignored all of my points, and illustrated how comically inaccurate and simplistic your talking points are, you resort to the level of a defeated child and call me a “moonbat.”
It’s too bad all of Ohio can’t read this to help them “wake up.”
Oh, and in case you are unaware, unless you are in communication with all of the world’s “terrorists” – and that includes the “terrorists” in America, South America, Asia, and Europe – you really don’t know that none of them agree with any of President Bush’s points. It’s just more unsubstantiated speculation (it’s actually quite a delusional comment).
I’m sure there are “terrorists” somewhere who are ecstatic about Bush’s handling of Iraq and Afghanistan, as it has become a breeding ground for new “terrorists,” the Taliban is returning to power, and Osama Bin Laden was never captured.
Actually, now that you think about it, MOST terrorists around the world were probably incredibly supportive of the decision to outsource the job of capturing Bin Laden when he was cornered a few years ago. So that’s one Bush point that the terrorists loved!
mp3 mp3 samsung mustek lg mp3- mf fm 12s5k