Mike Castle angry at Fox News and Rush

[nmbluesky]

:toast: :grr: :popcorn:

Mike Castle Blames Hannity, Limbaugh 'Lies' For His Loss

CASTLE: I think the misrepresentations and the lies of Sean Hannity and Rush Limbaugh on the air were another very significant part of all of this. I think some of the misrepresentations in my opponent's race were a part of it as well. How they ever came up with the theory that I voted to impeach George Bush, I'll never know. That was the news for a couple days right around the election time -- by, I think, Mr. Limbaugh. But those are the kinds of things that make politics very difficult.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/09/15/mike-castle-hannity-limbaugh-christine-odonnell-lies_n_718811.html

[jillan]

1. C'mon and endorse Chris Coons - ya know you want to!

[tularetom]

2. Unfortunately I think he's angry at the wrong people

He should be pissed off at the overwhelming majority of republican voters in his state who sat on their asses, stayed away from the polls and allowed a piece of crap like O'Donnell to steal this primary with something like 16% of all registered republicans in the state voting for her.

He should also be angry at the low information morans who voted for o'donnell because douchebags like hannity and limbaugh told them to, but I think the lions share of the blame goes to the jerks who couldn't be bothered to vote.

[Bryn]

5. Someone posted on facebook that

she got 30,000 votes out of 85,000 registered Republican voters. So the majority of them didn't vote.

[doc03]

8. If she got 30000 votes herself and you add Castle's votes

to that it looks like a fair turnout to me.

[johnnie]

3. Heh

[struggle4progress]

4. On the issues: Michael Castle on Technology

... Prohibit the return of the Fairness Doctrine. (Jan 2009) ...
http://www.ontheissues.org/House/Michael_Castle.htm

Prohibit the return of the Fairness Doctrine.
Castle signed Broadcaster Freedom Act
A bill to prevent the Federal Communications Commission from repromulgating the fairness doctrine. Amends the Communications Act of 1934 to prohibit the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), notwithstanding any other provision of any Act, from having the authority to require broadcasters to present opposing viewpoints on controversial issues of public importance, commonly referred to as the Fairness Doctrine.
Source: S.34&H.R.226 2009-S34 on Jan 6, 2009
http://www.ontheissues.org/House/Michael_Castle_Technology.htm

Wouldn't want that Fairness Doctrine back, now, would we, Mike :rofl:

[luckyleftyme2]

6. what rush and hannity lie?

how could you say that?
NAFTA
Main article: North American Free Trade Agreement

From left to right: (standing) President Carlos Salinas, President Bush, Prime Minister Brian Mulroney; (seated) Jaime Serra Puche, Carla Hills, and Michael Wilson at the NAFTA Initialing Ceremony, October 1992Bush's administration, along with the Progressive Conservative Canadian Prime Minister Brian Mulroney, spearheaded the negotiations of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), which would eliminate the majority of tariffs on products traded among the United States, Canada, and Mexico, to encourage trade amongst the countries.<58> The treaty also restricts patents, copyrights, and trademarks, and outlines the removal of investment restrictions among the three countries.<58>

The agreement came under heavy scrutiny amongst mainly Democrats, who charged that NAFTA resulted in a loss of US jobs.<11> NAFTA also contained no provisions for labor rights;<59> according to the Bush administration, the trade agreement would generate economic resources necessary to enable Mexico's government to overcome problems of funding and enforcement of its labor laws.<59> Bush needed a renewal of negotiating authority to move forward with the NAFTA trade talks. Such authority would enable the president to negotiate a trade accord that would be submitted to Congress for a vote, thereby avoiding a situation in which the president would be required to renegotiate with trading partners those parts of an agreement that Congress wished to change.<59> While initial signing was possible during his term, negotiations made slow, but steady, progress. President Clinton would go on to make the passage of NAFTA a priority for his administration, despite its conservative and Republican roots — with the addition of two side agreements — to achieve its passage in 1993.<60>

The treaty has since been defended as well as criticized further. The American economy has grown 54 percent since the adoption of NAFTA in 1993, with 25 million new jobs created; this was seen by some as evidence of NAFTA being beneficial to the US.<61> With talk in early 2008 regarding a possible American withdrawal from the treaty, Carlos M. Gutierrez, current United States Secretary of Commerce, writes, "Quitting NAFTA would send economic shock waves throughout the world, and the damage would start here at home."<61> But John J. Sweeney of The Boston Globe argues that "the US trade deficit with Canada and Mexico ballooned to 12 times its pre-NAFTA size, reaching $111 billion in 2004."<62>

hmmm nafta was clintons baby according to sexperts rush and hannutty!

[ProgressiveEconomist]

7. Great post. Now, with no Fairness Doctrine, we have the nightly news reporting polls

showing what voters wrongly believe about the facts without reporting the facts themselves.

[OnyxCollie]

9. Man, what a douche bag. nt

[Kurt Remarque]

10. and?

[lame54]

11. Sweeeeeeeeeet!