Monday, May 17, 2010

Election Time


We earlier presented our endorsements in the Republican Primary races for U.S. Senate and Third District Congress. Today we offer up a glimpse of what our ballot will look like tomorrow when we waltz into the polling place and vote in the Democratic Primary and the so-called Non-Partisan Judicial Election. How you vote is your own business. And no matter what they say, you can still bitch if you don't vote, but it just feels more righteous if you did.

DEMOCRATIC PRIMARY:

BILL HALTER for UNITED STATES SENATOR

GREG LEDING for STATE REPRESENTATIVE

PAT O'BRIEN for SECRETARY OF STATE

JUDICIAL ELECTIONS:

TIM FOX for SUPREME COURT (Pos. 6)

JOHN FOGLEMAN for SUPREME COURT (Pos. 3)

BETH STOREY BRYAN for CIRCUIT JUDGE (Div 5)

STEVE ZEGA for CIRCUIT JUDGE (Div 7)

LOCAL ORDINANCE:

FOR ORDINANCE ON CITY PARKS. This proposed ordinance will not raise the current Parks Hotel, Motel and Restaurant tax nor have any effect other than to establish a special city fund in which Parks HMR revenue could be used for the development, construction and maintenance of city parks.

16 comments:

  1. Why Fogleman? I mean, I understand that Jonah's family tree directly explains some of these endorsements, but why Fogleman?

    So much for "clarion tones" and "words of fire."

    ReplyDelete
  2. Looks pretty much like my ballot, though I differed in two of the judicial races. Duell seems like a highly qualified candidate for the Div. 7 Circuit Judge race.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Fogleman has actually set foot in a trial court, in any number of roles

    I'd imagine Henry hasn't even driven past one.

    ReplyDelete
  4. That, and Henry is fairly right wing, pandering to the Ark Fam Counsel and saying that her judicial philosophy is modeled after Chief Justice John Roberts.

    I certainly don't want more John Roberts' on the bench.

    ReplyDelete
  5. This bleeding heart voted for Fogleman. I couldn't bring myself to vote for Henry after she went on and on to the Family Council about how much she's like John Roberts and what a conservative judicial philosophy she has. Pass.

    ReplyDelete
  6. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YRqnZzqShy0&feature=related

    ReplyDelete
  7. Ha Ha closet Republican Courtney Henry wins- We sure need more thoughtful minds like John Roberts, not book burners like Kagan.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Jonah was right on in his endorsement of Greg Leding, whose friends donated a lot of time and effort to his candidacy, once again calling into question the old saw about money talks, talk walks. Or have it your way.
    Photos available on my main blog.

    And Halter has Lincoln right where he wants her. Plenty of youthful energy in that campaign, too.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Anonymous 11:01 PM--

    Ha ha-- conservatives burn far more books than moderates or liberals do. Not that it would matter to you.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Four out of eight of your selections won out.
    Congrats.

    ReplyDelete
  11. No you can't bitch if you don't vote!!! No matter what in the hell you think. It is our civic duty to vote and if you don't then you can't complain. Go jump in the lake!

    ReplyDelete
  12. actuually Kagan argued before the supreme court in favor of banning books on political thought & opinion. She is evil. Mr. Franks you are deeply misguided.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Anonymous 9:11 AM--

    Kagan presented the argument that pamphlets could be banned, and that no move had ever been made to ban a book under the law as it exists. If you have a problem with that, get the law changed. Changing the law is not the job of the judiciary. Also, in her role as Solicitor General, she presented the argument with inherent bias-- which was her job-- not as a jurist.

    I note that you didn't refute my contention that conservatives burn more books than liberals and moderates do. Since you have changed the subject to banning books, I'll contend the same in regard to that as well.

    ReplyDelete
  14. You are sick freak- burning pamphlets good- books bad??
    Go to North Korea- you will fit right in.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Anonymous 8:31 PM--

    I didn't say I agreed with that particular argument, but the legal justification is there, if you care to actually read it. As I said, she was arguing a position.

    Aren't you the logical one? You must feel like such a fool.

    Really-- you must.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Just vote for Halter and Boozeman will have to go back to prescribing glasses or whatever he is trained to do. He certainly isn't educated well enough to vote logically.

    ReplyDelete