While not a straight line equation these are the words of Corey O'Brien prior to his defeat yesterday by Paul Kanjorski.
“The only way to stop the bleeding is electing Democrats with fresh faces and fresh visions,” O’Brien said. “If we don’t do that, and we go into the election with the same old tired incumbents, we’re going to get wiped out.”
From The Times Leader:
In unofficial results, Kanjorski, 73, of Nanticoke, received 33.783 votes to 23,236 for O’Brien and 11,512 for Brian Kelly, a professor at Marywood University. That means 34,728 Democrats who had a choice didn't choose Kanjorski. Lou Barletta received 28,311 votes. I wonder if Kanjorski can hear the buffalo pounding the turf.
5 comments:
Obviously, Mayor Barletta was the big winner in yesterday's primary. That said, he can't start measuring for drapes just yet. If you've been reading the papers, Cong. Kanjorski intends to wage a harsh negative campaign against Barletta - and he has far more money to fund his attacks than Barletta has to fund his response. In addition, Barletta has to deal with Hazleton's continuing financial and legal woes, which may still generate an "October" surprise. Despite those cautions, Barletta and his supporters should enjoy their victory, and I'd expect his fundraising to improve as a result.
Clearly, the biggest loser in yesterday's primary was Corey O'Brien, who will have to spend the rest of his life wondering what might have been if Brian Kelly had not waged his bizarre campaign. (A campaign that, in the final analysis, seemed designed only to torpedo O'Brien's campaign by splitting the anti-Kanjorski vote. Whatever else he does, Kanjorski should send Kelly a fruit basket every May 18th for the rest of his life.)
If there was a downside in yesterday's results for Barletta, it's this: Kanjo knows he's in trouble, and he knows he has to go negative to win. Going forward, the question is this: can Kanjo pound Barletta into the ground before the economy pounds Kanjo into retirement? Well, at least we know it will be fun.
Kanjorski intends to talk about the fiscal problems facing Hazleton.
1. Kanjorski and Eachus have gone out of their way to avoid helping Hazleton financially. Heck the $20,000 Kanjo gave to Leighton was more money than he brought here. Kanjorski brushed off help for Hazleton as outlined in this press release from his own office.
http://kanjorski.house.gov/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1565
2. The national debt was $700,000 when George Bush left office. Kanjorski, Nancy Pelosi, and Harry Reid are responsible by their own party's admission for ballooning that debt to $1.6 trillion by the end of this year.
3. Not sure what you mean by an October surprise but as an attorney you must concede that 18 months for the Third Circuit Court of Appeal to rule on the IIRA seems a bit excessive when their other cases seem to arrive at a decision in 9 months average.
4. Agree about the fruit basket but that should come from Ed Mitchell.
5. Ed Mitchell only knows negative so there will be no surprise.
6. You hit the key and it is money. If Barletta wants to have a half decent shot he has to keep on fundraising. And the party has to support that fundraising.
Hazleton's financial woes can be solved very easily but not popularly. Although taxes went up 70% in terms of actual dollars it wasn't alot but still enough to matter to the type of low income most experience in Hazleton.
1. Financial help with the Intermodal would be perfect.
2. Eachus needs to start being honest with what is happening at the dredge site. Instead of an obstacle he needs to help with getting it done. It's a hole that needs to be filled but his egotistical attitude prevents him from doing what is right.
Selling the assets of the HCA is a possiblity but a revenue stream would be the preferred option. It is just my opinion but authorities were created by the legislature to help the municipalities that created them. While it may be true in the legal sense that they are a separate entity nonetheless it remains their purpose is to provide a need originally sought for by the municipality. Metamorphic changes may now mean that authorities need to be sold in a cyclical style of use. Nothing says that down the road an authority can't be created again.
Water runs under the ground or through our rivers and streams. No one owns those original sources just as no one owns the sun. Providing utility needs is creating the infrastructure to deliver that need from an unowned source. The HCA owns the distribution system, not the water itself. If it is time to sell that asset then sobeit BUT ONLY if the money can be locked so that only the interest is used otherwise it will be squandered by lazy politicians who refuse or won't have the capacity to think.
Mayor Leighton gets decorative lights for his riverfront project. PennDot wants Hazleton to pay for its lights in the new Broad Street Corridor. Do they think we are stupid and will cower to their political attitude?
People in Hazleton get called racist but it is those in Harrisburg who are "party racist" when it comes to refusing to help the citizens of Hazleton because they are served by a Republican Mayor and City Council.
Kanjorski and Eachus are going to work overtime to keep an "artificially created" financial problem in Hazleton. Had they lived up to their oath of office and served their constituents infrastructure projects that would lead to permanent jobs and more revenue would prevent Hazleton from relying on its residents as the source of needed income.
You have clients. If they have a $2 million account can they spend $10 million. If Barletta had the needed revenue and failed it would be on him and squarely on him. But when elected officials go out of their way to hurt hurt constituents over politics it becomes personal.
The IIRA has not been settled. Any notion that Hazleton owes $2.4 million is pure political rubbish that makes for sound bites. The multitude of lawyers and paralegals that submitted bills will surely not stand even if Hazleton loses. But therein lies the lie that is perpetuated to the public. The state of Arizona has won three court cases. Valley Park Missouri won its case. http://lawprofessors.typepad.com/immigration/2008/02/valley-park-mis.html
In October, 2008 the California Appellate Court ruled against San Francisco's Sanctuary Policy stating that the city must follow state law requiring police to report suspected aliens arrested on drug charges to the Federal authorities.
Hazleton is not in as bad a position as those who for political reasons want the masses to believe different.
Thanks for posting by the way.
Post a Comment