Letter To The Editor, Argus Press
November 26th, 2005 | by christine |This letter was submitted by Tom Ford:
“Rubber Stamp” Dave Camp’s at it again. He has abandoned the principles of his moderate Republican constituency and also left the Conservatives twisting in the wind while looking out for his own self-interests.
Congressman Camp has consistently voted against working families. The minimum wage has not been raised since 1997 and has stagnated at $5.15 an hour. While he will not support a raise for working families, he has actively supported raises for himself totaling up to $31,600 during that same period. He won’t vote to raise the minimum wage. He won’t support Food Stamps. He won’t support children’s health programs but he will give himself a $31,600 raise in an already more than adequate salary.
Congressman Camp can’t seem to fiscally restrain himself except when it comes to cutting programs that help the poorest of the poor. It’s time we had Mike Huckleberry representing us in the 4th District.
Thomas Ford
10 Responses to “Letter To The Editor, Argus Press”
By Gordon Matousek on Sep 7, 2007 | Reply
In response to Thomas Ford’s ” ‘Rubber Stamp’ Dave’s Camp at it again” byte of BS (Blatant Sophistry) -
I do submit that preaching to a choir of presumed room-temperature- IQs, as Mr. Ford’s tenor implies (playground na-na-na-na mentality) - may well keep his future policical ambitions and endorsements for cohorts stymied. An opportunity, here in the Argus Press to elucidate his own substantive solutions - lost.
The electorate expects the policy-makers to use their bytes
to convey positive and constructive direction for social evolution - not the bites of playground, rhetorical mutterings. At least I do.
It must be remembered that Michigan is in financial straits and Mr. Ford should frame his remarks with a nod to this reality. Could it be that Dave’s Camp is doing just that. He does have the advantage of having a hands-on position where Mr. Ford is ranting on the sidelines.
Gordon Matousek
By Christine on Sep 7, 2007 | Reply
Gordon, thanks for the comment. Dave Camp is the worst. He hasn’t had a single independent thought, ever. He just does whatever his party tells him to do. Michigan is in trouble because of conservative nutbag policies that Camp supports.
He is actually a member of both the mainstreet republicans, and the conservative republican study committee: two groups that philosophically oppose each other on several issues.
The only jobs Camp ever tried to save were the sugar farmers. Oh and guess who his biggest contributors are? If you guessed the sugar farmers, you get one right.
I’d like to have a Congressman who is willing to fight for jobs for everyone, and not just for the people who pay him.
Not sure why you are insulting the people Tom Ford is talking to, but, whatever.
By Gordon Matousek on Sep 13, 2007 | Reply
I see you’ve had to make your own presumptions - I presume. You’re not sure why, but, I am “insulting” Mr. Ford’s audience. Are you presuming that I’m insulting merely by opining in contradistinction to Mr. Ford’s imputations? Or does a nonpositive-catagorical-comment immediately qualify me as a Blasphemer… sans debate? Labelling my contribution as “insulting” puts you in the Ad Hominem Camp - were you aware? Bryan Caplan’s issue of voter rationality didn’ blip on your screen? - which prompts again - the query - can Mr. Ford’s factoid-void message and tenor, tender rationality in his people?
By christine on Sep 13, 2007 | Reply
You said you were preaching to “a choir of presumed room-temperature- IQs”
So I am not sure why you would insult people who read his letter.
But like I said .. whatever.
By Gordon Matousek on Sep 16, 2007 | Reply
A gentle click of your mouse can do wonders for bringing you to momentum on this dialectic - I contend - this dialetic should be elevated off the playground (this medium is THE MESSAGE). Bryan Caplan’s book, “The Myth of the Rational Voter”, should be part of this discussion. It would eliminate Argumentum Ad Hominem for starters. The basic gist is: today’s voter is blitzed and bamboozled by the impolitical hyperbole and plausible persiflage of muttering mendicants - attempting rational choices with this mental-melange gives us our present policy makers. That includes Dave’s Camp. May I complete your circular logic to indicate the ineluctable cognitive dissonance you would have had - had you pondered Dave Camp’s Voters. What were they thinking? Why would this majority, of whom installed your malefactor, elect him. Could they collectively be IRRATIONAL in their choice. Your perspective dictates YES. Could it be, the apparently, necessary hyperbole that drives one to distraction - drive them to rationally ignore it all. Could this also plague the Ford Camp supporters? This Caplan explores. Can we get there? Remember -the very definition of IQ - explicity defines half of humanity as below average.
Gordon Matousek
By christine on Sep 16, 2007 | Reply
Camp wins because the Democrats in the 4th district don’t give the people in the 4th district any reason to vote for a Democrat. The district is gerrymandered for a Republican and the MDP does not fight the district. It’s not because Camp is some wonderful guy.
Camp is super easy to beat, if the MDP would bring some game. He had to spend about $6 per vote last time, to keep his seat. And he’s listed as one of the most vulnerable incumbents in Congress.
Just have to get the Democratic Party to show up for the election.
By Gordon Matousek on Sep 16, 2007 | Reply
christinechristinechristine…..
“Democrats don’t give REASON.” Your pithiness eludes me. Your ad hociness imlies that Democrats don’t give REASON because their postulates lack valid premises (that’s why they’re postulates) What other implication is there? If they had valid premises - they would have REASON. But…they’re SLOP (Syllogistically Lacking Operative Premises). Potent intellectual grist propounded to Voters needs valid premises based on facts (presupposing those Voter have cognitive filters) to become theories where REASON, or in the policical arena, VERISIMULITUDE has been known to survive public scrutiny. Your pithinessless praxis, parades your main foible - you suffer from the IGNORE-Syndrome (Intentionally Getting Nowhere-Obviously Rationalizing Everything). The Bryan Caplon book - remember it? If you have time to Blog, you have time for Bryan. Pleeeeeaaassseee read it. It will improve your GRASP-Quotient (Gaining Resourcefulness At Scrutinizing Perplexities). In the meantime, you’re guilty of SOB (Sleeping On the Blog).
Gordon Matousek
By christine on Sep 17, 2007 | Reply
Well Gordon I don’t talk to people who say things like “if you have time to blog, you have time to ____” Now you’re just trolling, and I’m not going to get mired down with a troll.
By Gordon Matousek on Sep 18, 2007 | Reply
Easy out christine…proves my point…you just rationalized your own ignorance…you’re a credit to open discussion. if you don’t like it - tag it and scratch it. Read the book! your ad hominem is textbook.
By christine on Sep 18, 2007 | Reply
Gordon, as I close the comments on this post, I’d like to congratulate you for finally writing a comment that is completely comprehensible, and only slightly juvenile. A definite improvement.