Monday, February 13, 2006

Jim Marcinkowski posts at liberal site, chokes like the Detroit Lions

I read left-wing websites from time to time, and found this over at the Booman Tribune, which is similar to the Daily Kos website. Meet Jim Marcinkowski. Marcinkowski's answers are under the screen name Sea Eagle. I see no straight answers given, only political doublespeak. Now if he's giving doublespeak to people that should be his BASE, what does that say about him? Is he that worried about guys like me ripping apart his answers? He's dodged questions on abortion. He's gives slight generalizations on health care and trade and bashes "Wall Street" with no specifics. He also has a "blog bodyguard" on the site demeaning those who gave tough questions.

Now "Boston Joe" and I probably don't agree on much issueswise. That said, I respect him for his principles. Meet my choice explains his problems with Jim Marcinkowski. It's the same reason you will not see me voting for John McCain.

As for Marcinkowski, he's nothing more than an opprotunist. He has a vendetta against Bush, and ran for office twice before. He's trying to capitalize on the Bush hate from the left to get him into office. That's not good enough. First of all, he's running against Mike Rogers. Second of all, he's not giving anyone a reason why the people should vote FOR him. Third, his most recent campaign event was in Ann Arbor - outside of the district.

If this is a omen of things to come, then Mike Rogers won't have much to worry about. Even I could defeat this guy.


Keith Richards said...

I'm not too impressed with Jim Marcinkowski either. They have talked about him in the local paper (Democrat's Propaganda & Arguments) and nothing I read made him seem like a serious candidate. I suppose the Democrats are having trouble finding a reputable person to run against a strong incumbent like Rogers, especially in a district with a Republican majority.

I'm surprised you did not post anything about the Vice President's hunting accident. I've really enjoyed listening to newscasters discuss it over the last few days. It is clear that they no nothing about guns or hunting and are uncomfortable even discussing the topics.

Keith Richards said...

Pardon the typo. Obviously it should have read "know" rather than no. One of these days I will start proofing my posts before posting.

Dan said...

I don't know exactly what happened with the "A.D."(gun term - Accidental discharge) or who is to blame so I held back on that. I'm not a Quail hunter either, so I'm not an expert on it.

From what I've read though, both Cheney and the guy shot bear blame. Cheney for not seeing his target, and the other guy for not announcing his presence when entering the hunting zone.

Keith Richards said...

While listening to all the fuss the media was making in the last few days, I did hear a joke which put it all into perspective. It goes like this:

Q: Would you rather go bird hunting with Vice President Cheney or drive over a bridge in a car with Edward Kennedy?

A: Hunting with Dick Cheney because at least you will get immediate medical help.

Everyone familiar with the incident of Edward and Mary Jo in 1968 will understand.

Still, I expect the Vice President to be peppered with jokes about his misadventure, much the same way that Ford was every time one of his golf balls hit a spectator.

Anonymous said...

First, thanks for giving me the address of an excellent progressive web site. I disagree with your assessment Marcinkowski’s posting as “doublespeak, and don’t flater yourself, I’m sure he’s not worried “ about guys like me ripping apart his answers.” The answers you seemn to be looking for may be a little complex to type on a web site, but then again we alredy know who you are voting for. If you you really care what his stand is, listen to him speak.

I’m not sure what relevance your crack has about “he's nothing more than an opprotunist," nor do I see where that’s a bad thing. As for a him having a “vendetta against Bush,” that’s ridiculous. Onr thing thing that intrigued me about Marcinkowski was I did the exact same job in the Navy, and I went to hear him speak and meet him when he came to Howell. Ironically, John Kerry would have been our boss, or division officer, when he was the CIC officer on that Cruiser in Vietnam he served on.

Marcinkowski, like me, takes seriosely the oath of officel that says “I will supoport and defend the Constitution against all enemies, both foreign and DOMESTIC.” Too bad bush doesn’t take it seriously. As a former CIA agent and classmate of Valerie Plame, he and many other agents he kept in contact with, were outraged that this adminstraition outed a covert agent for revenge. People run for office for many reasons, and experencing ann outrage like that is a damm good run As for running for office before, my question is so what? Ronald Regan was a Democrate once, but he cross over to theh dark side.

The only thing that makes politicians responsive to their constituants and the people who elected them are elections, but the gop gerrmandered the 8th district so much that Rogers answers to no one but bush and the lobbyists.

Isn’t it funny that after the republicinan Abramoff scandal rogers holds these town hall meetings around the district. That must be the first time mikie has talked to anyone or spent any time in the district unless the person had a big check in his hand.

Your probably right that mikie doesn’t have to worry much because they have made the district so safe for him - and screwed his constituents in the process - and his huge war chest, but it would be nice if he remembered who he represents for just a few months, anyway. But you never know, the 8th was once a swing district. As for your joke, “Even I could defeat this guy,” again, don’t flatter yourself.

Keith Richards said...

Ah, KevinS, my favorite socialist comrade. I'll leave it to RepublicanMichigander to defend his post since he is the one that wrote it. But I do agree that Marcinkowski is not very trustworthy. When I go to vote I look for a lot of things. One thing I like to see in a candidate is predictability, because I don't want to hear him to make a lot of statements about his beliefs and intentions only to find out that his values mean nothing when voting on new legislation.

I would rather vote for a diehard liberal than a wishy-washy I'm-not-sure-which-party-I-want-to-belong-to "moderate" RHINO. There is nothing wrong with a person changing political beliefs over time but I like to see some evidence that a person actually believes what he claims to believe. At least with the liberal I know in advance what I will be getting, and I won't be getting a RHINO Republican that will embarrass his party everyday he is in office.

I really hate putting wishy-washy moderate Republicans in office because they always end up getting squashed. The problem is that liberals will not support a Republican and many Republicans won't side with a moderate, making it hard for a moderate to ever get enough support to get anything done.

Looking at Marcinkowski from a strictly non-political viewpoint, I think that he will have trouble with a lot of voters because of the confusion over what he REALLY believes. My feelings about Marcinkowski also apply to John McCain. If McCain gets the Republican nomination in '08 I will not support him. I believe that McCain will be a weak Presidential candidate and extremely vulnerable if the Democrats can find someone credible to run against him.

This is nothing personal against Marcinkowski. He may be the smartest and nicest person in the world. But voters will be very skeptical of his background and in a Republican leaning district that will be enough to keep him from winning, even if they are angry at the Republican candidate.

By the way, Ronald Reagan changed parties in the 1960's and people were still concerned about his Democrat past right on up until 1976.. It can take a long time to convince voters about your political sincerity after changing parties.

By the way, thanks for the entertaining posts. I just love listening to all the conspiracy stories you Democrats make up. Sounds like there is a lot of good material for a thriller here. Very creative.

As for Rogers and his local meetings. . . Obviously you don't pay much attention to politics. I've noticed just about every legislator comes home and has meetings like this every now and then, especially in an election year. That's everyone, regardless of his/her political party. That includes Democrats too, in case you are wondering. So I think that it is pretty safe to say that there is no conspiracy here. Just normal election year politics.

Getting down to economics, you say you took an econ class in college? I trust it was not the balance-your-checkbook type of nonsense that they often teach in high school economics courses.
So tell me, where does wealth come from? How is it created? How do you increase the wealth of a nation? And in real life, how do businesses decide where to build new locations?

The things that baffles me about you socialists is that socialism has failed or is in the process of failing everywhere it has been tried, yet you still come out and keep defending your redistributionist beliefs. You talk about wanting to eliminate poverty, but to do it you want to take away incentives for private citizens to create new wealth. Without new wealth all you can do is take money away from one group and give it to another. This is what the Soviet Union did, and all they succeeded in doing was making nearly everyone in their empire poor. Everyone in the Soviet Union had free health care but the hospitals had so few resources available that they were often unable to provide good care.

So how do you propose to turn the U.S. into a socialist paradise without killing the goose that lays the golden egg?

Anonymous said...

I am definitely not a socialist, and I have no idea where you got that I was. I am even more certain I am not your comrade or friend.

When I vote for someone I don’t always vote straight party, and I also look at their character or leadership abilities. I have voted for republicans in the past, and I even hesitated slightly in voting for Diane Byrum over MR in 2000. I don’t understand this RHINO crap, and I don’t support extremists on either end of political spectrum. I know many, loyal republicans that have done much more for their party and community than you ever dreamed of who would probably wear that stupid rhino label. I’m so glad the Democrats tent is so large and inclusive we have no such labels.

I don’t understand this hate for John McCain, either. I can think of few people I have more respect for after what he want through and has accomplished. He also can work with people on both sides of the aisle, and isn’t that what a leader does to get things accomplished? If he got the gop nomination in 08 I would consider voting for him if my party nominated someone who I see as not much of a leader, kind of like if the Democrats nominated someone with GWB brains.

I have no clue what you’re talking about Democrats “making up conspiracy stories.” You will have to give me an example.

I got news for you, I pay as much or more attention to politics than you. Please give me another time when rogers actually met with constituents before that little PR town hall blitz last month. He holds office hours for constitutes every month at the Brighton City Hall, but it’s only his staff. During the 2000 election he pledged to open a district office in Livingston County, especially after the Livingston County voters put him over the top by 111 votes. Where is it? When Debbie Stabenow represented the 8th Congressional district she has a district office on Grand River Avenue in Genoa Township. This county got much more representation in Washington from Stabenow than rogers, and we still do. I stand by what I said in the last post, if you don not have a check in your hand, forget about talking to Mr. rogers.

I’m not going to dignify your insulting BS about taking an economics course with an answer.

Again, I have no idea where you get the notion I’m a socialist, or that I have “redistributionist beliefs.” Asking everyone to pay their fair share has nothing to do with socialism or redistribution beliefs

Anonymous said...

is it just me or is "kevins" a little bit touchy. He rants and raves right off the dem talking points, im sure he is an independent (right). Rep Rogers has been a leader on deficit reduction, keeping a free market health care system that works for everyone, and issues that impact our jobs right here at home.(ddo your homework here>>> aliitle less hatefull will give you a clearer head) He has gone overseas often to Iraq, Afghanastan etc. "kevins" should get out more, Mr Rogers is around alot for someone that travels to the mideast for his duties on the intelligence committee.
i admit, i am a proud republican but Rep Rogers does a great job, works hard and had his feet squarely on the ground ( i see him at school events for his kids jsut about every week.
"kevins", you need to take a look at the GOP> you have hit the hieght of your cynisysm and it has clouded your judgement. Take a deep breath and come into the light........

Keith Richards said...

Kevins -

Man, you sure have some anger management issues. Have you ever considered getting some counciling to help you deal with this? Maybe a little medication would help calm you down a bit.

As for your socialist leanings, you can call yourself anything you want. You have earned the label of socialist based on all the nonsense economics you keep ranting about.

I'm not surprised you were unable to give any answers to my simple economics questions. It is obvious that you have no knowledge of the subject, in spite of any classes you claim to have taken.

And when you go in to counciling, make sure that you discuss this compulsion of yours to keep talking about hate. I've been reading a lot of posts on this blog for the last few months, and you are the only person that I see talking about hating other people. It really is unhealthy, you know.

Dan said...

Kevin said "if you don not have a check in your hand, forget about talking to Mr. rogers."

That's not true. I talked to Congressman Mike today, and every person at this morning's event had a chance to talk to him. They also had a chance to talk to three of his staff members as well.

Anonymous said...

Right out of the gop playbook, if you don’t have any facts or logical arguments, stoop to personal attacks. I stand by every thing I said about rogers- and everything else I said, but now that election time is nearing, and there’s a viable candidate, I’ll think we’ll see rogers a little more. But, again, if you don’t have a check in hand, it will be little more than a handshake and an insincere greeting.

allison collart said...

kevins, it is quite obvious that you are the designated Dem hack on the blog. Cheers to you. Must be an aweful job. Mr Rogers is a well respected member of congress and our community. He is engaged in a ton of charities here and in Lansing, speeks often at civic groups and other engagements. You dont have to try very hard to see, hear or touch him.

I think you are a little confused in your intense dislike for him and your misguided political leanings. Liberals tend to be mean, dis-passionate, and full of contempt for those in america who work hard and get ahead without a government program. You certainly fit the bill. I'll expect to read more of your unfounded personal jabs at republicans with continued little substance in the future. I sure hope the Dem's arent paying you for time on this thing. All the best to you.

Anonymous said...

Well Ms. Collart, I am not the designated anything. I simply saw posts filled with misrepresentations, half-truths and outright lies coming from a blog in my community, and I felt like I should try to set the record straight. Believe me, I’m taking more than my fair share of personal attacks, but I’ve been around republicans long enough to be used to it.

I disagree with your description of Mr. Rogers, but like I said before, we’ll begin to see him a lot more now. I have not see anyone respond to my pointing out rogers vowed to open a district office in Livingston county almost six years ago.

I have no idea where you got the idea I dislike Mike. I like him personally very much, and I enjoy hearing him speak. However, he’s not doing the job the people of the 8th Congressional district elected him to do.

Liberals are the exact opposite of that you described, and they are passionate for equal rights for all, not just for people just like them. Actually, you just described a conservative.

I wish the Democrats were paying me, but this blog is not that important. Besides, between the three jobs I work to make ends meet, I still manage to volunteer for the party because I am passionate about my country and community.

Anonymous said...

My dear Allison, Democrats are for the working people. They want a fair wage for a days work, they want people who have earned their pensions to receive them and healthcare that is affordable for all. We support our troops, our Democratic Representatives in congress work hard to pass bills for additional healthcare for them. I am sorry Allison, you have watched too much Fox News and you seem to confuse the two parties. One (Democrats) work to protect our families and our troops the Republicans cut prorams for our students, our schools, our seniors and our troops.
Do a little research, you will see the truth.

Anonymous said...

My dear anonymous, how condecsending. I would expect nothing less from those who believe they are smarter than the average american. Please keep it up. Makes me proud to be a Republican.

Your entire answer is bad talking points. "Democrats work to protect our families and our troops..." Good stuff there. I see Democrats protesting our troops, supporting gay marraige, pushing for tax increases, take away private health care of those who earned it, block legislation that reduces the costs of home heating oil ( I know you want a gov't program to pay for it)and gasoline, more regulation on the backs of the american worker, more lawsuits to raise the cost on the middle class, oh yea, and ask the top 5% of wage earners who already pay 65% of all federal income taxes to pay alot more, make it very difficult for someone to start a small business, support the marraige tax penalty just to name a FEW of your destructive "middle class" positions.

I would be embarrassed to talk about the Dem agenda if I were you as well. Well, keep up the elitest attitude it turns people off and have fun at your next troop protest!

Anonymous said...

No, anonymous, what you see is us protesting to keep our sons, daughter, fathers, mothers, brothers and sisters out of harm’s way when there is no good reason for them risking their lives, off on a mission based on mistakes, half-truths and cheery-picked intelligence.

No, anonymous, what you see is us protecting marriage.

No, anonymous, what you see is us trying to get health care for the millions of Americans without it.

No, anonymous, what you see is us trying to protect workers after this administration rolled back enforcement of the most basics protections, like in the mines in West Virginia.

No, anonymous, what you see is us trying to maintain a middle class against the bush attempt to eliminate it.

Anonymous said...

Yes, Kevins, there is a Santa Claus.

Yes, Kevins, your party wants socialized medicine where it can take up to 6 mos for surgery on a broken hip for a 74 yr old in canada.

Yes, Kevins, we both know that the Bush admin has not reduced ONE mining reg (not one).

Yes, Kevins, your party insults every great deed done by the brave men and women who serve in Iraq by protesting and professing your hate for the commander in chief. Elections, more equal rights for women, kids in school a functioning economy are all the tools for the next generation to reject terrorism. Dont fool yourself, those soldiers have volenteered to fight there while you chose to buy all the crap from political partisans that care little for the truth and much for their own personal political gain.

Anonymous said...

Yes, Anonymous, my party does want health care for all Americans, including the working middle class and poor.

Yes, Anonymous, we both know that Bush assigned a mining executive to head the Mine Safety Agency – kind of like having the fox guarding the chicken coop – who immediately changed the safety rules, striking down some safety rules that had been in effect for 35 years. Here’s a link And forget about enforcing safety rules.

Yes, Anonymous, many more people in my party, including myself, have worn the uniform than the hawks in the White House that plunged us into a war in Iraq for no reason. My party supports the troops by trying to get them the proper equipment before they deploy and getting them the proper care when they return. We also support them by only putting them in harm’s way to protect the United States

Anonymous said...


Well said............!!!!

Anonymous said...


It looks like you got the last laugh....:)