< 1 2
2 of 2
Woops!  Brownbackistan Backlash….
Posted: 23 February 2014 10:32 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 16 ]
Member
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  797
Joined  2012-10-10

I tried one link from the Capitol Journal and got the message “Blacklisted source”.  The next time, the link was from the Washington Post.  It, too, got the pop-up message of “Blacklisted source”.  I’ve linked CJ Online before and had no issue.  Probably censorship by the owners of the site, which they are more than entitled to do on a privatly owned discussion board.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 23 February 2014 12:29 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 17 ]
Member
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  94
Joined  2011-07-25

I just tried to post from both of those sites and got the “blacklisted source” message.  A minor annoyance as there are still ways to post from those sites if you really want to.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 23 February 2014 01:18 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 18 ]
Member
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  797
Joined  2012-10-10

Amazing how they will let a troll like CS on here to rant and rave, saying he is of much higher authority than 97% of the world’s meterologists and scientists… but will not allow links to newsworthy articles,  just because they are from a competing newsrag.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 24 February 2014 08:59 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 19 ]
Member
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  289
Joined  2012-10-10

Slate’s article is silly. Saying Brownback must have read the bill even when he claimed he didn’t, because it was “only 2 1/2 pages long?” Yep, that’s totally how governors work, they read all the bills under three pages long the minute they hear about them.

Besides, Davis wasn’t all THAT quiet about the problem with the bill. According to LJ World (can’t link to it!) he signed a statement along with Gail Finney, Julie Menghini, Broderick Henderson and Tom Burroughs, calling HB2453 discriminatory. Would Brownback really introduce legislation like this just so MAYBE people would get mad at Davis for saying something but “not enough”? Hardly. If anything, it was just a general move to solidify his base, or possibly testing the waters for some larger Koch Bros legislation. We already know it was written by one of the Koch think tanks.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 25 February 2014 07:12 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 20 ]
Member
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  94
Joined  2011-07-25

Davis didn’t speak out strongly against the bill until some of his supporters and donors raised a fuss at him for his initial statement being cautious.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 25 February 2014 09:17 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 21 ]
Member
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  289
Joined  2012-10-10

For Slate’s theory to make any sense, we have to believe:

1) Brownback knew in advance that Davis wouldn’t respond in a way his supporters approved of;
2) Enough Democrats who would have otherwise supported Davis would get so mad about what happened in February, 2014 that they would remember nine months later and, as revenge, decide to vote Brownback or third party or not at all;
3) This number of Democrats would be enough to sway the vote; and
4) The admission that the bill was written by the Koch-associated American Religious Freedom Program would be far less damaging to Brownback than Davis’ presumed loss of voters.

Not buying it.

Even if this was just Brownback’s first volley in a campaign to discredit Davis, it’s weaksauce. Why tip your hand on something so easy to go awry?

Profile
 
 
Posted: 25 February 2014 09:28 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 22 ]
Member
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  94
Joined  2011-07-25

When desperate, politicians or their minions often do some unexpected or unexplained things.  As I said before, I thought the Slate article was interesting—not that I necessarily agreed with everything it asserts.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 25 February 2014 10:32 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 23 ]
Member
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  797
Joined  2012-10-10

Quite the fun in Arizona.  The right wing extremist legislature rammed through a bill almost identical to the Kansas bill.  Now they are begging the Governor to veto the bill.  The extremists got their political points by voting for the bill.  They are now saying 1.) the didn’t read it, 2) they didn’t understand it, or 3) they didn’t realize the economical damage it would do to the state.  Wow!  At least Brownie got the “R” Senate to shut the bill down before he got painted in the same corner as the AZ governor.  Really interesting to listen to the interviews with AZ “R’s”.  They are asking forgiveness for the very same thing they are condemning D.C. for doing when passing the Affordable Health Care Act.  Sheesh!

Profile
 
 
Posted: 25 February 2014 08:36 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 24 ]
Member
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  289
Joined  2012-10-10

Just to clarify, I’m not trying to argue with anyone here, only pointing out that I am convinced neither Brownback nor his aides have the ability to do something like this deliberately, nor would they align themselves with a position that could potentially make them look like they were against anti-gay legislation.

Larry, I have a friend who was appalled by the Kansas bill, but he insisted Kansas was the only state that attempts to pass these sorts of things. With Indiana, New Mexico and Arizona actively pushing anti-gay legislation over the last few weeks, I’m not sure HOW he got that idea, but it’s a really good example of how Kansas’ place in the popular mindset is solidified as the definitive example of a backwards red state.

Profile
 
 
   
 < 1 2
2 of 2
 

Terms of Service | Privacy Policy | The Manhattan Mercury, 318 North 5th Street, Manhattan, Kansas, 66502

Reproduction of any kind is prohibited without written consent.