Saturday, April 17, 2010

CV bias?

My pal Paul Stebbins has been doing some research and sends along this guest post. PJ ran for the Republican nomination for State Rep in the 120th District in 2006.
He also sent this to the TL.

Recently I have seen letters supporting Congressman Chris Carney as "brave and courageous." I dare Rep. Carney to tell me that he did not have a one-on-one meeting with Nancy Pelosi, the most liberal democrat in Congress. He changed his vote and his courageous and brave stance doomed many of the unborn. However that is a whole other letter.


There is a reason I don't trust the Citizen's Voice and it is this. Among research I noticed on opensecrets.org that James Haggerty Sr. has donated three thousand dollars to the campaign of Chris Carney. Matthew Haggerty has donated 2500.00 and Daniel Haggerty has donated eight hundred dollars to Rep. Carney. This wouldn't be an issue except that two are publishers and one is the General Manager of Times-Shamrock which owns our local Citizens Voice and Scranton Times. How am I supposed to read their endorsements knowing that they have invested money in candidates. I also researched the editors and managing staff of your news paper and there were no donations to candidates. I guess this clearly shows why the Times Leader is the newspaper to trust when it comes down to endorsements.

In the end, predictions don't matter when you have a horse in the race. Citizens voice has turned out to be biased and now should be seen as flawed when they make their endorsements this fall when it comes to candidates they monetarily supported. So if the Citizens Voice doesn't print your letter that is against Chris Carney's vote then perhaps this has set the record straight.

Paul Stebbins
West Pittston

Here are my sources for your review
http://www.opensecrets.org/indivs/index.php?capcode=d7vcp&name=Haggerty&state=PA&zip=&employ=&cand=


Maybe he missed this LTE in yesterday's Voice


Reps. Carney and Kanjorski voted wrong on health care

Editor:

I find the editorial section describing the "courageous" actions of congress downright insulting. If anything, this vote demonstrated how Congress is more interested in special deals and listening to party leadership than in respecting the wishes of their constituency. Chris Carney's 10th district is 5 to 4 Republican, yet he voted for a wasteful bill because "Americans deserve the same health care as congress." Unfortunately, Mr. Carney fails to understand that Americans are not allowed to spend money recklessly like their congressional counterparts.

Paul Kanjorski is worse. He essentially voted for the end of Sallie Mae in his own district with the Federal takeover of student loans. In this economy, he didn't place the interests of his constituents first.

I intend to vote against Carney in the upcoming election.

Robert Kirby

Harding

9 comments:

Pizza Pete said...

A health care vote was a vote for abortion? Please stop this silly BS. It has been made very clear that federal money cannot be used for abortion. What is it that makes working people fight against health care for 30 million Americans but these same people never said a public word about an unjust war in Iraq? How many people were killed, crippled and disfigured by that war and these principled individuals hold their tongues and don't send letters to the editor. Let's get our priorities straight. American's deserve health care and these useless wars must end. Amen!

Pizza Pete said...

So Paul Stebbins think that those three individuals must give up their personal right to support the candidate who they think best represents their interests? That's unamerican!

NO PIZZA FOR YOU PAUL STEBBINS!

Anonymous said...

besides putting people in prison or fining them how is this bill going to provide insurance? i have a better idea. if fat fucks stop eating pizza they wont need as much health care!

Big Dan said...

The definitive question about the media is this:

Do the OWNERS of the media sway the output of the media...or are the WORKERS in the media (journalists, etc...) FREE to write what they want?

Do the OWNERS of an industry control that industry's output, or do the workers?

The OWNERS do, because they OWN it.

Now, you can't have your cake and eat it too...

If the OWNERS of the CV sway the output of the CV...then the nationwide corporate OWNED mainstream media isn't liberal, because it's OWNED by 5 corporations and 90% conservatives. That's who OWNS the U.S. national mainstream media we're supposed to think is "liberal".

So, you can't say the CV sways Democratic because of their ownership...and then say the national mainstream media is liberal.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KYlyb1Bx9Ic

Big Dan said...

Also, as a side story, the Times Leader is OWNED by Richard Connor, and he is a diehard Republican who, after the Times Leader broke the Sherwood/mistress choking story, they endorsed Sherwood anyway after Connor took over AND endorsed Rick Santorum.

So, let's be consistent across the board with ALL arguments.

Pizza Pete said...

Media Liberal is just another sales pitch to steer the dumb Democrats into voting against their best interests by voting Republican. These same no brains who have the audacity to defame pizza eating also think Carney was wrong for having a one on one meeting with the Speaker of the House. Now that makes perfect sense. You need more pizza in your diet but you're going to have to go out of town to get it. NO pizza for you!

Anonymous said...

The Scranton Times/CV owners have endorsed democrats for decades- No surprise there. They throw softballs at democrats just like Connor's TL does to republicans. If you actually take a paper's endorsement as gospel you are a sheep. And as far as your stance on the "unborn" goes, I'm waiting for you bible-thumpers to raise the billions of dollars it takes to raise these "un-aborted" children right without fear of neglect and abuse. There are reasons for abortion, and I'm catholic & not for abortion for most reasons, and not all people are religious and hold those beliefs. I would say most abortions are done with the lower class people who neither have the intellect or money to support a child they don't want. Instead of patting yourself on the back for blocking abortions, prepare that safety net for the children that are unwanted & a target for abuse.

Pizza Pete said...

9:28, you are obviously one of the very rare individuals who have either eaten too much pizza or not enough. You are a Catholic and against abortion for most reason? How about as a Catholic being against abortion for ANY reason. You actually believe that the majority of abortions are for poor people? Are you nuts or just pizza starved? Poor people have kids (according to many) as a full time business. They keep welfare running smoothly. I don't think a person had to be religious to believe that the Nazi's killing hundreds of thousands was a religious issue nor is killing the unborn. It isn't a religious issue, it is a moral issue. NO pizza for you.

Austin said...

Even the most liberal version of the health care bill actually made getting an abortion a lot more expensive. It made sure that not only is federal or state money being used but that the economies of scale benefit is not used to lower the price of abortions.

It did all of this before the Stupak amendment.