Friday, July 14, 2006

Livingston GOP releases "endorsements"

From the Argus

The Livingston County Republican Executive Committee Thursday night announced that nine judicial candidates have "core values" consistent with the party, but stopped short of issuing an endorsement in any of the three Aug. 8 primary judicial races.

While it wasn't a technical endorsement - if nothing else, these candidates were acknoledged as the better candidates for judge.

The names mentioned were Jay Drick, Christina Heikkinen, Bill McCririe, Carol Sue Reader, Linda Walker, Roberta Balon-Vaughn, Carol Hackett Garagiola, Lyle Dickson, and Suzanne Dugas.

The Circuit Judge race was not addressed as that race is not on the primary, but only the general election.


Mike MacTavish said...

Dan, this is not an endorsement, and deep down I know you know this. Do not spin it as anything but what this is. This is a COWARDLY action by your committee trying to be on both sides of the fence. The Livingston County Republican Party SOLD OUT when the Livingston County Press and Argus turned up the heat. Dan Meisler put the pressure on you guys, and you all turtled like Claude Lemieux did against Darren McCarty. The truth hurts, Dan. That's why I do not see your usual in depth insight.

What happened? Did some big donors or powerful politicians threaten your committee? If they are politicians, who were they? Name them. I thought Republicans did not support judicial activism. Obviously some people on that committee support activist judges like Theresa Brennan. I want to know who supports her besides David Morse. Someone please name them either in a letter to the editor or on this blog I know who to not to vote for election time.

This crap is one reason why I am a conservative and not a republican. I do not associate with cowards and people who want to be all things to all people. Dan, you disappointed me with this post. I thought if anyone had a backbone, it’s you.

Communications guru said...

Well, as usual I predicted this one right, but it’s kind of like picking the favorite professional hockey team in southeast Michigan. Wow, I bet there were some hard decisions that had to be made. NOT. Of all the endorsements, there are only two that I cannot yet positively ID as republicans. Hell, some were even members of the executive committee. My only question is why you even bothered to have them fill out a questionnaire? The only thing I could figure for a reason was if there were two candidates who both happened to be republicans it would be used to decide which one, but you chickened out and endorsed both republicans running against Judge Brennan.

As for “mike MacTavish’s” question, Judge Brennan has the endorsement of Judge Pikkaraninen, Judge Dan Burress, the Brighton City Police Officers Association and the Michigan Association of Police Organizations, just to name a few. In fact, many more than Mr. Drick. I also have a question for him. How can you be a conservative and not be a republican? Then by your reasoning you can be a liberal and not be a Democrat.

What’s really funny is dan is always quick to announce the results of the polls, but since Judge Brennan is ahead of Drick 150-120 it will be a while before we hear about that one.

Dan said...

Mike, I won't name the names of the voters there because internal matters stay in house. If you want to know, go to the meetings and you can figure it out.

If you don't like what goes on, join us and change it. Run for precinct delegate as a write in and help select our committee for next year. If you think I'm not hardline enough, toss me out.

Dan said...

Also Mike -

Use that energy to help Jay.

Communications guru said...

I went to my mailbox today, and I got the disgusting drick mailer. I’ve seen a lot of attack ads in my time, which I really have to problem with if they are true, but this piece is one of the worst.

It “compares and contrasts the candidates,” but there only two boxes, one for drick and one for the opponent, yet there are three candidates. I’m going to assume the right side of this smelly piece is for Judge Brennan instead of Christina Heikkinen, because that’s who you have been attacking for months.

It starts off saying drick is a “Bluer Star Army dad who supports our troops.” Well, SSGT. David Spiker, who recruited his son, is a friend of mine.

Then he says his opponent, Judge Brennan, “led and promoted a cut and run anti-troop protest.”

I don’t know where to start with that whopping lie. There has never, ever been a “cut and run anti-troop protest” in Livingston County to begin with. The protest Judge Brennan lent her name to for the permit was held in 2003, BEFORE THE WAR IN IRAQ!!! I was there, and there was no anti-troop anything.

The President was telling everyone that spring the war was a last resort, and Iraq was an immediate threat to the U.S. The protesters said wait and let the weapons inspectors verify there were WMDs. It turns out bush was less than honest and the protestors were right, and to top if off, no one has ever supported an immediate withdraw from Iraq, even though this folly was unnecessary and created more terrorists than it has neutralized. But the bigger questions are, what does this have to do with a District Court Judge, and do we want a judge who would lie like that.

I assume you mean Emily’s List. They are not a pro-abortion group, they are a pro-choice group, and there is a big difference.

First, I’ve never heard of “Pregnancy Hotline,” but I’m glad he supports them. However, I’m sure the Livingston County Pregnancy Helpline could use his support. They are a great organization, and I support them also.

I’m not sure what exactly “support” means, but I do know what donate means. I’m glad that drick supports this organization I have never heard of, but I’m sure glad Judge Brennan donated to Planned Parenthood, if that’s the case. They provide more reproductive health care, things like pap smears and other services, to low-income women than any group in the county, especially after the Livco Department of Public Health cut back.

Page Field said...

Gee Mike, its called politics.

I've been nose picking this issue the last few weeks. It does not look good for a litmus test questionaire with issues of entrapment for a non partison post. I'm sure someone saw the light and said this is not worth pushing anymore. The whole concept of the questionaire sends a bad message to the voter public. Just a flat out bad choice and why the party leadership did not see this train coming is scary.

And Mike let me know where your doing your standup routine next. Its very funny. Your thoughts of judicial activism rampant at our local courts is hillarious.

Mom of two said...

Communications Guru:

I'm assuming you mean Pregnancy Help Clinic. As a supporter/donor, one would assume you would have received the memo on the name change.

Dan said...

Kevins, MI List is the state version of Emily's List. - This is what activist judge Theresa Brennan supports.

Communications guru said...

“Mom of Two”
I never said I was a donor of Pregnancy Helpline, I said I was a “supporter” of Pregnancy Helpline, just like Mr. Drick. I guess a supporter can mean just about anything you want it to mean. I have never heard of the Pregnancy Help Clinic or the Pregnancy Hotline nor can I find them listed in any county guide, so I guess I did not get the memo.

As for dan, first of all Kevins was kicked off this blog, but thank you for the address of a great site, I bookmarked it. As I said in the first post, it is a pro-choice group, not a pro-abortion group, and there is a big difference. It’s funny you completely ignored the huge, huge lie about the so-called “cut and run anti-troop protest, and compound it with another lie. This one, “This is what activist judge Theresa Brennan supports.” What are you basing that false statement on?

bluzie said...


Emily's list supports a woman's privacy. It is not and has never been Pro-Abortion, this shows your extreme ignorance to believe anyone is pro-abortion.

Emily's list supports a woman's right to privacy. It strives to elect those who support the privacy between a woman and her doctor. The American Medical Society sets the standards of medical practices.

If you support the Government involvement in this issue then stand behind your beliefs... Don't lie about pro-choice groups in order to gain support, it's cowardly! Abortion will hopefully one day be so rare we won't need this group to exist. You my dears who claim to be pro life seem to be quite the contrary to me. You can't disuss the issue so you tell lies.

Mom of two said...

Bluzie: See my response on the Full Article on Endorsement blog to see my response - it contains some lies as well. I think you will find that lies are easy for the pro-abortion side to tell as well. Remember that ol' expression regarding those who live in glass houses?

bluzie said...

Yep I understand that many people tell lies. I want a staight answer for you though Mom of two. When you say you want to overturn roe vs wade, are you willing to say you want women to be charged with murder that you talk about? Or are you just all an all hat no cattle Republican too?
I have heard enough of this crap, do you want a murder charge or what?

Mom of two said...

Bluzie, you are a mom of three. What if someone caused enough harm to you to kill one of your children while you were pregnant? Would it matter to you if you were 12 weeks pregnant or if you were 35 weeks? Would either be different to you? Either way, you still have a dead child. Would you want that person who caused the harm punished or would it be okay to let it go?

bluzie said...

Cannot you bring your self to answer my question?

In the case you stated above, I would not think a murder charge would be in order.

Really now, you answer my question!!!!

Know where you are going when you join a cause... seems like you do not have a clear vision of where you want to go. Do you?

Mom of two said...

Well, I certainly have a different opinion than you if a child I was carrying were killed. I would consider it murder.

I think abortion is murder - I've answered that question many posts ago. It's killing a child. A child in stages of development is still a child. My child born at 40 weeks is still in development stages - it's called growing. A child born at 40 weeks has to be fed and nurtured to survive. We prosecute mothers who give birth, abandon their babies and leave them to die in a bathroom stall, for example. Why prosecute them???? It's no different in my opinion...a baby is dead. The only difference between this case and a medical abortion in a clinic, (except in the instance that the mother's life is in jeopardy), is that other people actually have to see and feel that baby in the bathroom stall. I think if more people saw the aborted babies, there would be more of an outcry to stop those as well. Again, it's no different. One is in the is out. Does that answer your question?

I don't have the answers. I don't know what would make women who have abortions for other than "rare" reasons stop doing it. I do know however, that at some point in their lives, women who have abortions, "just because" will have serious emotional consequences to that "choice". I am glad that there are organizations out there like Pregnancy Help Clinic who offer counseling to those women. God knows they will need it.

bluzie said...

So this means your answer is yes unless to save the life of the mother?

Count Me Red said...

bluzie, jeeze, layoff. You sound crazed on this. Do you just like to hear the word "Murder" or something. IT IS MURDER to kill a baby, no matter how old it is.