Montana kids don Jack Abramoff costumes for Halloween. In other news, Senator Conrad Burns reportedly had his front porch light turned off.
New West’s photo-essay, “A Day with Jon Tester.” Apparently the Burns campaign turned down like exposure. I guess lobbyists don’t photograph too well.
Shane comments on the kind of rhetoric we can expect to hear from President Bush in Billings on Friday.
David Crisp was push-polled by the Burns campaign.
Craig urges to vote against a minimum-wage increase, implying the raise will impact local business and lead to higher unemployment. A quick Google, however, will show that there’s plenty of theory and some evidence to the contrary.
Hello! Even conservative Idaho newspapers are picking the Democratic candidates, Larry Grant and Jerry Brady!
Did Republican candidate for Idaho’s 1st District seat, Bill Sali, fake health symptoms after an accident to pad a lawsuit? His doctor thought so.
And Bill Sali supports Idaho’s proposition 2 – the Howie Rich regulatory-takings initiative – wait! No, he doesn’t! Or, maybe. Depends on who’s asking.
Western Democrat has CNN’s take on the cultivation and creation of Democrats in the interior West.
The Pentagon expands its propaganda wing. Er…is this legal?
So, wait! Iraq really is about the oil? That’s what Bush says, anyway.
Another George Allen scandal brewing?
Blogger Mike Stark to file assault charges against George Allen for allowing his staffers to beat him up for asking the Senator a question.
David Neiwert sees the Allen-goon assault the natural result of the right using eliminationist rhetoric against their liberal opponents. Fed on hate speech and violent imagery, it’s natural that supporters, when backed against the wall, will lash out violently.
Another sex and assault scandal for a Republican incumbent?
A prominent conservative blogger quits the GOP over the myriad and repulsive campaign tactics…and is thrown to the dogs by his – now former – pals. Classy.
Tactics like this one: dressing up an attack mailer as a sex offender notification.
Kossak kamarvt makes a seasonal appeal to the country to put the second string in the game. (Hat tip to Sara.)
-
Recent Comments
Lizard on Help Replace Missoula Waterwor… klemz on Help Replace Missoula Waterwor… Eboy on I Guess That’s All There… Lizard on Help Replace Missoula Waterwor… JC on I Guess That’s All There…
November 1, 2006 at 3:56 pm
A bunch of ivory tower economists support minimum wage. Let’s face it, ivory tower economists are much more swayed by emotional ideology than the hard facts of economic science. The economics of the minimum wage are indisputable…
November 1, 2006 at 4:03 pm
Well, that’s funny, because it’s usually dire predictions from these pencil-necks that all you “free market” conservatives use to trample on folks struggling to make a living on the minimum wage. Just check out the “Seven Days at Minimum Wage” for a peek into the lives of the people who this bill will affect.
What next? You’ll tell me that hard-working people deserve to starve because they didn’t go to college? Isn’t that what you people are slamming Kerry on?
Seriously, based on all the flip-flopping, double-speak, and shrill personal attacks, I’m beginning to think the majority of you diehard GOP supporting conservatives don’t actually have any core beliefs.
November 3, 2006 at 1:25 pm
Your comments are amazing. You purport to help the poor, yet the minimum wage is detrimental to the poor in various ways as the umpteen articles I’ve posted on the subject attest. Your problem is that you can’t get beyond your emotionalism to think rationally about the issue. Despite your blanket characterizations, “free market conservatives” (whatever you want to call us) care deeply about the poor. Sure, raising the minimum wage will help some people. But in typical liberal fashion, you wind up hurting many while you help a few. You can always find your five or six “poster children” who would improve their standard of living from some policy or another. What you seem to lose sight of in your emotionalism is that economics looks at the aggregate effect of a public policy decision. Economic science isn’t as concerned about the effects on five or six individuals when thousands, perhaps millions, are impacted by a public policy decision. So, ya, “Seven Days at Minimum Wage” could easily be replaced by “A Life Without Skills” because a considerable population of unskilled workers never had the opportunity to earn ANY wage. Moreover, what about the fact that businesses are often forced to cut hours of minimum wage workers when the minimum wage is increased? It amazes me that you can be so smug in your unscientific, emotionalistic public policy arguments. You’re in that category of people that usually say, “Well, at least we’re doing something about the problem.” Who cares if what you’re doing is even practicable. If what you’re doing hurts some and helps others, let’s just do documentaries that highlight the isolated good. Man!
November 3, 2006 at 1:30 pm
Please see today’s post on the minimum wage.
November 3, 2006 at 1:35 pm
You purport to help the poor, yet the minimum wage is detrimental to the poor in various ways as the umpteen articles I’ve posted on the subject attest.
Wait…you’re the one who criticized “ivory-tower economists”! So it’s only your economists we should believe? I was trying to show that alternative theories on the subject exist, that it isn’t black-and-white.
You rejected theory as being “ivory-tower,” so I showed you the non-Ivory-Tower take.
There’s also real-life statistical analysis that shows an increase in the minimum wage might actually aid local economies. But naturally you’d reject that, too.
And I’m the one who’s smug? Who’s tenaciously clinging to his ideology here?