Monday, October 16, 2006

You know them by their fruits...

You can tell a lot about a candidate based on who endorses them and contributes to their campaign. In the race for the seat in the Tennessee House for the 18th District, Schree Pettigrew tells us that she is a "moderate Democrat," she's not all that liberal, she says-she even agrees with Stacey Campfield on eminent domain reform and opposes an income tax, just like her opponent Campfield.

Yet Schree Pettigrew has received the vast majority of her now-bursting campaign warchest from fat-cat trial lawyers who want rid of Stacey Campfield so they can replace him with someone who will oppose tort reform, so that they can line their pockets and healthcare costs (and the burden to taxpayers) will continue to skyrocket.

Schree Pettigrew says she supports traditional marriage, yet Pettigrew is openly endorsed by the gang at Out and About magazine because she is "pro-gay." We all know that for many of these folks, "pro-gay" means "I support 'gay marriage,'" not merely "I respect people's sexual orientation or choices." I should add here that Pettigrew's campaign manager is a fellow by the name of Johnny Dobbins. I'll quote exactly what Out and About says about Mr. Dobbins:

"Her campaign manager, Johnny Dobbins, is a GLBT community member. He and his partner, David, are welcome additions to our local community."

Now, to be fair, I have met and talked with homosexual persons who believe in upholding the traditional definition of marriage-they are out there, and perhaps Mr. Dobbins is one of these people. Considering the article quoted from was partly about who might support gay marriage, I somehow find that possibility a very doubtful one.

Mrs. Pettigrew says she is against the income tax, yet she has met with Tennesseans for Fair Taxation, the group leading the fight for the income tax on more than one occasion, and they have endorsed her. What are we to take this as, a case of "do as I say, not as I do?"

I'll bet Mrs. Pettigrew is pro-life, too...right?

Who endorses Stacey Campfield?

Congressman Jimmy Duncan
, a man of impeccable principles and who is far more representative philosophically of the people of Knox County than Schree Pettigrew, has endorsed Stacey Campfield.

State Representative David Davis, the presumptive future Congressman from the First Congressional District, a man who has worked with Campfield and knows his character, has given Stacey Campfield his endorsement.

Former Congressman and U.S. House Majority Leader Dick Armey, a man who knows what it means to be a real conservative, has endorsed Stacey Campfield.

The National Rife Association has endorsed Stacey Campfield because they know he will stand up for our right to keep and bear arms.

Tennessee Right to Life has endorsed Stacey Campfield because they know he will defend the right to life of the most defenseless-the unborn.

Unlike so many others, including his well-funded opponent, Stacey doesn't take PAC money or corporate money because his votes are not for sale.

It is pretty black and white, folks-trial lawyers, gay marriage advocates, and income taxers endorse one candidate, and people of faith, commitment, and character endorse the other one.

Vote for courage and character-If you can vote in the 18th District, vote to re-elect Stacey Campfield on November 7th.

Labels: ,


At Monday, October 16, 2006 12:41:00 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Hey, don't know if you saw this, but Stacey also got endorsed and got a bunch of campaign money from Don Sundquist's old Chief of Staff, Justin Wilson -- he was the biggest of the income tax people...

It kind of worries me, cause I haven't really heard much out of Stacey about this. Have you heard from him about that? It surprised me when I heard about it...

At Monday, October 16, 2006 12:41:00 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

From the horse’s mouth:

I am Mr. Dobbins; thank you for your courtesy in calling me that.

I left the Pettigrew campaign after the Primary to pursue my studies at UT Knoxville. Joshua Hedrick is her new campaign manager.

Yes, I am gay. So is my partner --go figure. We have been together for almost six years.

Did Schree know that? Sure. Did Schree accept it? Sure.

Do I support the Vote No on 1 Campaign? Yes.

Does Schree? No.

Did that matter to me? No. She is a good and decent person who sees people for who they are, not what they are.

For the record, Out and About NEVER reported that Schree was supporting Vote No on 1.

I gather Out and About's not supporting Campfield is due to the fact that he doesn't return their phone calls nor does he talk with his gay constituents.

So, did the metro pulse endorse Schree because of her ties to the Gay community (or the actual lack, thereof)? Nope. They did it because Campfield is a waste of taxpayers money.

At Monday, October 16, 2006 12:46:00 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

....also...the article you quoted was about political races and NOT vote no on 1. Tisk-Tisk.

At Monday, October 16, 2006 11:05:00 AM, Blogger Deacon David Oatney said...

Mr. Dobbins;
First of all, thank you for posting and correcting the record. As for calling you "Mr." well, you deserve that-contrary to the beliefs of some folks, most conservatives are not out to dehumanize people who are gay. Being gay doesn't make you any less of a good political operative, either.

My purpose here was to point out the contradictions between what Mrs. Pettigrew says and what her actions have been. As I believe, I act. I do not meet with income tax people if I do not believe in it, I don't care whether their endorsement will help me-I don't believe in it so they can take their endorsement to Hell with them if they like, I can do without it-my guess is that Stacey Campfield feels that way, too. Apparently, Mrs. Pettigrew will take endorsements from wherever she can get them, so either she is being dishonest with the folks endorsing her about her beliefs, or she is being dishonest with the people about her beliefs, or (most likely) she is not being completely forward about her beliefs because if she were, she would anger one side or the other, and would likely lose badly.

As for Stacey Campfield not taking calls from constituents-I know Stacey personally and I have never known him not to take a call from an INDIVIDUAL constituent, no matter what their politics are. What's more, he's likely to take that call any time of the day or night-and I know, I've seen him do this. When it comes to talking with constituents on a one-on-one basis or addressing them or their concerns individually, most people in Nashville, in both parties, play the "leave your name and call again" game-but not Stacey Campfield. Stacey just tells people the truth, and that is why the State Democrats (and not a few corrupt Republicans) are pouring so much into this race, they want to SHUT STACEY UP!

Stacey is one of the few people in Nashville who will stand up to Jimmy Naifeh with all his might-that's why Naifeh wants so badly for Campfield to be beaten, he's a threat to the corrupt power structure up on the Hill-you can't have someone who blogs the truth about what is going on, and you can't have someone that is so straight and direct with the people, because that could conceivably bring a 129 year-old regime to its knees.

I can't trust that Naifeh will not use Schree Pettigrew as a political pet with which he can get what he wants. If you think I am just being overly partisan about that, consider that honest liberals such as Sharon Cobb don't trust Naifeh, either-he is at the head of a corrupt and scandalous House leadership that thanks to cable access is finally coming out in the open after years of being a closed political society. Stacey Campfield is helping in this process of exposing corruption, greed, and graft, and that is why the House Leadership wants so badly to shut him up, and why they are funnellnig resources to Mrs. Pettigrew. You can bet they will expect their favors in return.

At Monday, October 16, 2006 11:12:00 AM, Blogger Deacon David Oatney said...

Stacey did address this specifically on his blog a couple of weeks ago, and explicitly said he took no money from the Sundquist people or income tax folks.

Now, does that mean that Mr. Wilson didn't give Stacey some dough? may mean that there were no strings attached in the way of voting for an income tax, and that's going to be the case. Since Campfield takes no lobbyist money or PAC money, if I am in his shoes I turn down a personal donation from nobody short of the devil himself.

Stacey's for an income tax like I am pro-choice-he ain't and I'm not.

At Monday, October 16, 2006 11:19:00 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Hey: This race is between Schree and Stacey, not Naifee. She is a big girl, as she demonstrated on The Voice this morning, and is very capable of making her own decisions.

Consider this: Wouldn't you want to hear both sides of an argument before making a decision? That is what Schree done, and I suspect, will continue to do when working with her constituents. If she wins, wouldn't you want her to entertain your audience? Food for thought.

Also, TFT NEVER EVER endorsed Schree. Here are two of the many that did: FOP and Fire Fighters.

I understand that Stacey isn't a union Man, being from New York and all, but unions like these are the heart and soul of the south.

At Monday, October 16, 2006 11:22:00 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Since Campfield takes no lobbyist money or PAC money, if I am in his shoes I turn down a personal donation from nobody short of the devil himself.

Mr. Oatney, You should check your facts on the PACs, my friend. The Republican House Caucus is a PAC and Campfield has taken over $15000 from them alone. You say his money is clean, TREF says most of it leads back to a PAC.

At Monday, October 16, 2006 12:29:00 PM, Blogger Deacon David Oatney said...

Mr. Dobbins;
By the reckoning that the House Republican Caucus (which amounts to nothing more than the PARTY-I hope they'll support Stacey, that's their job)is a PAC in the sense of a special interest PAC, yes, its a PAC on paper, existing to elect Republicans and promote Republican candidates-but that is essentially the same as taking money from the Party, it is essentially the Party's arm in the House. No matter who voters support in November, they aren't clueless-educated ones can pick up on differences like that.

Secondly-Re: the New York remark. Stacey's mother graduated from Knox Catholic High School. His roots are here-he has as much right to be called a Tennessean as you, or me, or anyone else. You might not care for Stacey, but if he's done nothing else, he has earned that right. Oh, and the unions-you're right, this is the South, we are not dealing in large Northern cities here-and that means union endorsement does not always (and more often than not these days does NOY) guarantee liberal Democrat victories. I trust you know that also.

God Bless

At Tuesday, October 17, 2006 12:01:00 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

As much interest as you have in this race, you'd think you lived in the 18th district.

Are you calling Mrs. Pettigrew's faith in God into question? I think that's pathetic.

At Tuesday, October 17, 2006 12:11:00 PM, Blogger Deacon David Oatney said...

Mr./Ms. Anonymous/Obviously Ashamed to Use a Name;
Apparently, you didn't read the post, my friend. I never said a THING about Mrs. Pettigrew's personal faith.

I have an interest in this race because it so happens that a friend of mine is running against Mrs. Pettigrew and I do not take kindly to half-truths and outright lies being told about him, obviously spurred by people affiliated with her campaign.

As for Mrs. Pettigrew herself-I'd LIKE very much to believe that she is a better person than to do such things. I find it highly unfortunate that some Democrats believe the only way they can win in a Republican District is the dirty way. We've heard all sorts of things out of the Pettigrew campaign about why Stacey Campfield should not be re-elected, and we know she is funded largely by fat-cat trial lawyers-indeed she was put into the District specifically to run against Stacey-that is a fact not in dispute.

We've heard little about why she should be elected other than she isn't Stacey Campfield!

At Tuesday, October 17, 2006 6:20:00 PM, Blogger Steve Mule said...

Reasons to vote for Schree:
1) She won't embarrass Tennessee and make national news trying to join the Black Caucus.
2) She won't be run off the floor of the Tennessee State House for wearing tennis shoes.
3) She won't alienate fellow legislators (that she'll have work with) by putting out a blog that ridicules them.
4) She knows how to use a spell/grammer checker (see 3 above).
5) She can write and think in complete sentences (see 3 above).
6) She doesn't blame all the state's problems on illegal immigration.
7) She has a real plan to improve education in Tennessee.
8) She has a real college education.
9) She's not afraid of a public debate.
9) And, finally, and you know I hate to be a bum kick but ...
She ISN'T Stacey Campfield and that is, by itself, a good enough reason to vote for her.


At Tuesday, October 17, 2006 9:03:00 PM, Blogger Deacon David Oatney said...

Before I say what I am about to say ,I want you to know that on a personal level, I think YOU are a fine person, so bear that in mind as I say what I am about to:

The vast majority of your list (and the attitude displayed within it) is why I thank God I am not a liberal. It is symtomatic of the sort of prudery that exists within liberal circles like a socio-spiritual cancer that eats away at the soul.

For all the talk of the coffee shop leftists and champaigne socialists about "ordinary people" and "caring for the poor,' they show that most of them don't know what its like to be ordinary or to have little.

Part of what you said proves my point-

"She won't alienate fellow legislators (that she'll have work with) by putting out a blog that ridicules them."

He tells the truth, they want to shut him up-they want somebody who will go along with the establishment-Schree Pettigrew is the establishment candidate in this race-ask all those trial lawyers and Naifehites who have given her money.

"She has a real college education"

I know you didn't mean it that way, but that is an incredibly elitist attitude, and that attitude is rife on the American Left-an effite, elitist snobbery that says "we are more educated and better than you." I find it disgusting and repulsive beyond all telling. The sad part is that I believe many of the folks who say and think such things are well-meaning. I don't think they realize just how elitist they are, and they'd deny it if you pointed it out to them.

I think you are a good guy Steve-you need a few more regular conservative friends!

At Tuesday, October 17, 2006 11:17:00 PM, Blogger Steve Mule said...

We're discussing politics so don't worry, I'm not going to take it personal. If I start to, I'll ask you about it because I'm probably getting some part wrong and just took it wrong and we'll clear it up fast.
Secondly, your reply shows how wrapped up your political thoughts are in the biases and stereotypes foisted by spin monkeys of the Right.
I am not a coffe shop lefty or a champange socialist - I can't afford to be finacially. Since leaving the Army I've never had a job that paid more than $10/hr (most not even close). Also, coffee shop genius's irritate the bejebbers out me - it's all mental masturbation and I have better things to do with my time. So watch your stereotyping - next you'll be accusing me of liking watermelon. Which, by the way, most people including me, do regardless of stereotype.
Stacy's blog did redicule his peers - go back and read the archives. He tried to play "Mr. Smith Goes To Washington" but all he really did was play smartaleck kid in a grown up world. Glenn Renoylds (sp?) has a blog - the UT Law Department isn't after him. Why? Because "Instapundit" isn't, and never was, the toy of a semi-illiterate smartaleck. Sorry, David, but Stacy stepped on it and has never recovered from that simple fact. The grown ups in Nashville do not play. Especially not with a smartaleck, know-it-all that can do nothing but inflexably repeat hardcore rightwing talking points. His effort to paint himself as the persecuted champion of the "regl'ar work'n man", a victim of "Naifehites" is laughable on its face.
Schree is an "establishment" candidate only in the sense that she is mature and easy to work with. You might not love the compromise you'll get working with her but it'll work. Stacy's way is it's his way or the highway.
The comment about Schree having a real college education I meant just as I wrote it. Having a college education doesn't make you any more special or any more better than anyone else. I'm living proof of that. HOWEVER, her degree is real, from a real acreditated college (UTK) while Stacy's is from an UNACREDITATED ONLINE college. I used to get SPAM from things like that (now tho I get pre-approved home loans which would my landlord would find funny). So the comment is rel and valid. If neither had a college education it, of course, wouldn't be an issue and would never have even come up. However, Stacy claimed to have one and so 'BunKo U' is an issue. A real issue. It makes you wonder what else he's stretching or would stretch given the circumstances.
I know Stacy and like him, personally, but he has painted this picture of himself that he beleives and sells to all who'll buy but I'm not buying because it just ain't him. You know those photo studios in Gatlinburg where you can dress up in cowboy clothes and the pictures come out like wanted posters? That's what he's selling - only in political poster format.


At Wednesday, October 18, 2006 12:31:00 PM, Blogger Deacon David Oatney said...

First of all, there are no spin monkeys on the Left apparently....(RIIIIGHT).

Schree and "compromise..." If Schree Pettigrew is ready to vote for Bill Dunn as Speaker of the House, I reckon that is a compromise I can live with-somehow I doubt that, though, since Naifeh was out with bells on supporting her. Bill Dunn is a person of real character and knows something about achieving compromises that are fair and not sell-outs. Stacey Campfield supports Bill Dunn and associates with him and people like him. Schree Pettigrew has all but publicly embraced Naifeh. I know which of the two I think is a person of better character-and that has nothing to do with political party, because you know me well enough to know that neither Democrat nor Republican is exempt from the Wrath of Oatney when in the wrong.

Education: I know its hard to believe, but I wouldn't give a damn whether Stacey had a degree of any kind. I have one, its legit, I worked very hard for it, and I am proud of it-but my degree doesn't make me a good or bad candidate. I don't even care that Stacey's decree came from an online U, even an unaccredited one-its a non-starter with me. Why? For the same reason that Junior's failure to pass the bar is a non-starter with me...who gives a flying flip? What is important is the ability to do the right thing. Stacey has demonstrated to me over and over again his willingness to do the right thing in the face of criticism. Others sell short or sell out, but Stacey does the right thing even at the risk of his own hide. I wish we had more people in elected office with that kind of courage-I have even questioned whether I have it in me from time to time.

I have read the archives. His blog is a breath of fresh air because it makes those in power uneasy and uncomfortable. Perhaps you don't think that is a good thing...the Founding Fathers thought it was a great thing.

I can only hope that if Mrs. Pettigrew is elected, she is half as forward and open as Stacey has been, but I somehow doubt that this will be the case. That isn't because I think that she is a terrible person (I can't say that I am as sure of the personal worthiness of the folks running her campaign at this point, however), but I think she'll be too concerned about not rocking the boat-she'll go along to get along and be the tagalong of the Democratic establishment on Capitol Hill-that is not acceptable to me, period.

As to the folks who wonder why I am so interested in the 18th District race: I might be more interested in the 17th, but Frank Niceley (R) is unopposed. I'm putting my meager and tiny efforts where they are needed

At Wednesday, October 18, 2006 12:54:00 PM, Blogger Steve Mule said...

My point was she has a REAL degree, not that she has one. Stacey claimed to have one, claimed it in a way to put him on equal footing with her, when all he did was send them $5 (or whatever)and get a certificate in the mail. That's all.
Stacey has accomplished nothing in Nashville, he's a walking joke. You want a piece of legislation to die - give it to Stacey. Whatever else he is, he is ineffective. Legislative bodies often have colorful characters and we're better for them, but there's a difference between being colorful and being a clown - are they effective?


At Wednesday, October 18, 2006 2:09:00 PM, Blogger Deacon David Oatney said...

I know you are going to think this is crazy, but Stacey reminds me in the best of ways of another maverick-Jim Traficant.

When we think of Traficant now, we think of his troubles with the IRS and the fact that he went to prison. What we forget is that his IRS problems came about after his political opponents on both sides of the aisle tried everything else that they could to shut him up. Traficant was effective alright....he got right at the heart of abuses in Washington and angered both parties with equal vigor.

His opponents also said "he's a do nothing," "he's a clown," "he's a waste of taxpayer dollars." In Stark County, Ohio, they loved the man...he was one of them, and he just told them the truth. Had he not gone to prison, he would still be in the House today.

Stacey is a Republican Traficant without the IRS on his ass (though if he wins re-election, it wouldn't surprise me if "charges" appear out of nowhere-I've seen it happen before.

That's why Ragsdale hates Stacey, and why Naifeh hates Stacey, and why I love Stacey, and a lot of other folks love him too.

At Friday, October 20, 2006 5:09:00 PM, Blogger Seven Star Hand said...

Hello Dave and all,

Understanding why religion is strong delusion

Christians often quote things like "know them by their fruits," yet after millennia of being duped into abetting blatantly evil scoundrels, many still don't understand the meaning or import of much of what they read. The same canon paradoxically propounds "faith," which means the complete opposite of "know them by their fruits," i.e., to discern the truth by analyzing deeds and results (works) and to weigh actions instead of merely believing what is said.

The deceptive circular logic of posing a fantasy messiah who urges both discernment of the truth and faith (belief without proof) clearly represents a skillful and purposeful effort to impose ignorance and confusion through "strong delusion." Any sage worth his salt could understand the folly of this contradictory so-called wisdom. This and mountains of evidence demonstrate that faith and religion are the opposite of truth and wisdom. It is no wonder charlatans like Rove, Bush, and others have marked Christians as dupes to be milked as long and as hard as possible. Any accomplished con artist easily recognizes religion as the ultimate scam and fervent followers as ready-made marks and dupes.

We now live in an era where science has proven so much about the vastness, rationality, mathematical preciseness, and structural orderliness throughout every level of our 11-dimension universe. Nonetheless, large percentages of people still conclude that these flawed and contradictory religious canons are the unmodified and infallible "word of God." People who can't (or won't) discern the difference between truth and belief are easily misled about the differences between good and evil, wisdom and folly, perfection and error, reason and irrationality, and right and wrong.

The fact that political leaders have always had close relationships with religious leaders while cooperating to manipulate followers to gain wealth and power is overwhelming evidence that the true purpose of religion is deception and delusion. People who are unable to effectively discern basic moral choices or to reason accurately are easily indoctrinated to follow the dictates of national and imperial leaders who wrap themselves in religious pretense. Truth and wisdom are direct threats to the existence and power of empires. That is why imperial leaders always strive to hide so-called secret knowledge and impose deception and ignorance upon their subjects.

What then is the purpose of "faith" but to prevent otherwise good people from seeking to understand truth and wisdom?

Here is Wisdom !!


At Sunday, October 22, 2006 12:46:00 PM, Blogger Deacon David Oatney said...

What on earth does any of that have to do with the subject of this post?


Post a Comment

<< Home

Locations of visitors to this page
Profile Visitor Map - Click to view visits
Create your own visitor map