Disgusted with Dems Says:
October 31st, 2008 at 3:01 pm

I went to one of the early voting locations today and when I refused the Copening propaganda her supporters thrust at me in the parking lot, I was called a “b*tch” as I walked away. How dare they treat voters with such disrespect.

In this next case, emailed in by my one of my readers, a partisan person was sanctioned:

I voted this morning at the Lake Meade/Tenaya location.   Probably the most excitement was a guy from the Obama campaign that had on a yellow T-shirt that said “voting questions – ask me” or something like that.  He was sitting along the line of people waiting to vote. 

I didn’t think anything of it, until I noticed that all the poll workers had on blue/white/red shirts.  About that time, the guy was escorted out of the area.  He took off the shirt and then was milling around with the ‘poll observers’.   I was ready to grab my cell phone for a picture if anything exciting happened, but nothing did. 

I waited about an hour to vote.  My hubby was on Channel 3 – they were interviewing people about the early voting process – was it easy, what did we think, etc.

There is not supposed to be any partisan canvassing at the polls.  Also, in re: to situation 1 above, here is what item 3 of the Nevada Voters’ Bill of Rights, as outlined in NRS 293.2546, says about voting:

3. Each voter has the right to vote without being intimidated, threatened or coerced.

That first voter should have complained to the poll workers so they could have asked those Copening people to take their handouts and nasty remarks elsewhere.

I checked it out and Beers has never been under investigation by the Nevada Ethics Commission, so if the advertising did state this, it is indeed false.  And if the Dems and Copening knew this, they did libel Beers and should be held accountable.

You can read the complaint here.

The Nevada Democrats have certainly been peddling a lot of lies and sleaze this campaign season.  Their billboard smears against Beers were called “misleading and blatantly false”  by CityLife editor and Democrat Geoff Schumacher, who is no fan of Beers.  You can read more about it here.

And if you care to learn the differences between the candidates’ policies, you can go here.

Earlier this week we read about attempts to smear Senator Bob Beers via malicious and misleading bright yellow billboards.  Now the Las Vegas Sun reports that we have a flurry of expensive glossy mail pieces snowing down on District 5’s Republican state Senator Joe Heck.

The colorful mailers feature a series of vivid images of suffering cancer patients and say that Heck, a Nevada doctor, voted against requiring insurance companies to include cervical cancer screenings in their basic coverage, while simultaneously accepting campaign donations from those very insurance companies.

That claim is false.

Insurance companies have been required by the state of Nevada to cover screenings for cervical cancer since 1989.

The mailers don’t include any citations (of course!) but are reported to refer to legislation from 2007. 

Heck did vote against a 2007 bill that required some insurance companies to cover Gardasil, the vaccine for the human papilloma virus, which has been proven in clinical studies to be a precursor to cervical cancer…and was criticized by some for doing so, but Heck says he opposes new mandates on insurance companies because they increase the cost of coverage.

Interestingly, the multi-colored mailings don’t say a peep about Heck’s opponent, retired Clark County School District administrator Shirley Breeden, who had little to say about the mailers.  She told the Sun, “The tone, to me, is exactly how he voted. Times are tough and people want a change.”

The TONE [of the mailers]…is exactly how Heck voted?  What does that mean? 

Heck either voted Yes or No on this bill, and these mailers either Lie or do not Lie.  Talking about their “tone” is meaningless and has no bearing on the facts.  I am so tired of this kind of verbal sidestepping from some of these Dems as they speak loftily of the “tone,” “mood,” “feeling,” and “nuance” of issues.

These touchy-feely terms evade the stark truth and help candidates wiggle out of calling a spade a Spade:  these shiny, brightly colored mailers are lying about Heck’s voting record!! 

Shirley Breeden’s comment about how well their “tone” goes with the pitch, timbre, and tint of (this darkly dishonest campaign against) Heck should tell Nevada’s voters all they need to know about her. 

And let’s not overlook this little political tidbit:  Not only are the Dems champing at the bit to control the state Senate, they are also Quite concerned because (it is rumored that) Heck, a well respected doctor and colonel in the Army Reserve, may challenge Harry Reid in 2010.

AND Heck’s name has been thrown in the hat as a possible candidate for future governor. And in that case, he could wind up facing off against another Reid — Harry’s son Rory, current chairman of the Clark County Commission.

Is the shade, hue, and color of these Democratic paint-by-numbers smear projects starting to look like something to voters now…?

UPDATE:  A reader rightly points out that campaign seasons cannot be unscrupulous (see my first sentence).  Political seasons aren’t unprincipled, and the age is not corrupt.  It’s people who are dishonest, dodgy, and devious.

This past Saturday I did a double take upon glimpsing a bright yellow billboard (on the corner of Ann and Durango) adorned with large radiation danger symbols and accusing Nevada State Senator Bob Beers of being “In Bed with the Southern Nevada Porn King,” a quote the billboard attributed to the LV Mercury.  I was so doubtful about the billboard’s credibility and so curious to find out the “real story,” I spent this morning doing some digging.

FACT #1:  The Bob Beers campaign team did accept a $10,000 contribution from one Raymond Pistol, owner of one of Las Vegas’ many topless bars, in Beers’ 2006 run for governor.  He returned half the contribution after losing in the primary.  According to Beers, “Suggesting that campaign contributions from a legal business (licensed by elected officials of both parties) come with “obligations” is an erroneous conclusion at best.”

FACT #2:  The Mercury, which is no longer in print, never linked Bob Beers and Raymond Pistol in any way, shape, or form.  So says Geoff Schumacher, publisher of the alternative newsweekly Las Vegas CityLife and former editor of the Las Vegas Mercury, in his LVRJ piece yesterday. 

Schumacher wrote (the following quotes are excerpts from his column), “I’m no fan of Beers’ conservative views, but as a journalist taught in the old school, I’m even less enamored of misleading and blatantly false campaign charges.

“I just so happen to have been the first and only editor of the Las Vegas Mercury during its existence from 2001 to 2005, and when I saw the billboard, I could not recall publishing an article describing Beers as being “in bed with the ‘Southern Nevada Porn King.’ “

FACT #3:  That billboard is shameful and ought to be taken down.

As I noted in a post the other day, Republicans have historically tended to be more reliable voters than Democrats, i.e. they show up at the booth with a lot less prompting and prodding.  This is a factor that cannot be left out of the registration equation.  Democrat campaign managers need to figure out how many registered Democratic voters are needed to equal/exceed one Republican vote.  Because it is an issue of quality over quantity, it is not going to be a one-to-one correlation.

On this subject, NV Senator Bob Beers has some comments on all the media attention the voter registration issue is getting.  He notes that while much Ado has been made about the voter registration gains made by Democrats in the past year (here and here and here), some Republicans see it another way:

The hyper-aggressive Democrat voter registration program, funded by Harry Reid’s millions in advance of his 2010 re-election or election of his son in his place, seems to have been focusing on that peculiar brand of ultra-transient new resident, most of whom have probably moved home in the wake of the flattening of Nevada’s once-thriving job market.

Some contend the Democrat voter registration program has become so aggressive that it has taken to registering people who do not actually exist.

The majority of existing voters who are changing their party affiliation to Democrat had been registered Non-Partisan. Those people probably were already voting Democrat, so changing their registrations won’t have much impact on November end-of-season voting, though it will cause an increase in the raw number of Democrats who vote in primaries.

As case-and-point, Beers points to the primary balloting…particularly in the Porter-Titus congressional district, where more Republicans voted than did Democrats.  26,892 Republicans voted compared to 26,241 Democrats despite all the buzz re: the massive registration lead Democrats had supposedly built in that district.

Below Beers shows the trend in some other districts where there was both a Democrat and Republican primary:

Because we are a huge tourist destination, Beers asked the Legistlative Counsel Bureau to develop a statistical measure of tourists v. residents – which they did, here.  The upshot is that when you figure in all the “visitor days” (how many tourists are here for how many days vs. the resident population) you find that 21.5% of human activity on any given day in Nevada can be attributed to tourists while 78.5% can be attributed to residents.

Beers goes on to do some math re: our per capita crime rates and suggests we might be a less aberrant population than the rankings say.  Also, Greg McFarlane chimed in on a Comment and said that a few years ago Mother’s Against Drunk Driving was up in arms about our drunk driving rate – which did not factor in all the drunk tourists.