Commentary

Adios to Conrad Burns

By Pete Talbot, 11-09-06

	Caption: MIDDLE: Sen. Burns Wednesday Morning with his granddaughter in Billings. Photo by Pete Talbot

I almost feel sorry for Sen. Conrad Burns. Almost. It’s the morning after the election and I’m sitting next to him at the coffee shop in the Billings Hotel and Convention Center, site of the Montana Republican Party’s election night extravaganza. Burns is playing with his granddaughter and fielding phone calls. He’s not morose but you can tell, in his heart he knows he lost.

I almost feel sorry for his staff. Again, almost. They’re taking it a lot harder than Burns. I’ve worked campaigns and a loss can be crushing. These folks worked hard for their candidate and came close – oh so close.

But here’s the real story. It’s a few hours earlier, around 4 a.m. I’m at the 4B’s Restaurant, corner of Grand and 24th. I’m eating a chicken fried steak with lots of gravy. Patrick, the guy behind the grill, recommended it. Suki, my server, is holding court. She wants to know about Patrick’s club-boxing bout Thursday night, downtown.

“If I win, I get $125. Just showing up is worth $50. It puts food on the table, “ he says.

“Can women fight?” asks Suki, “I’ve got rent to pay.”

So who best represents them? Conrad Burns? I don’t think so. Jon Tester? We’ll see. Which of the candidates would raise their (minimum) wages? Who’s going offer them some sort of health plan?

Conrad Burns is going to cut their taxes. Like Patrick and Suki worry about their tax bracket. Burns wants us to stay the course in Iraq. (John Kerry, despite all his back peddling, was right. I’m betting there are a lot more folks with G.E.D.’s than master’s degrees fighting for us in Iraq – guys and gals like Patrick and Suki.)

Tester should have clobbered Burns. Tester was the perfect candidate for the Democrats to run against Burns: finger-missing, flat-topped tractor driver from Big Sandy. The Republicans tried to paint Tester as too liberal for Montana. Now I’m probably too liberal for Montana but Tester, he’s about as mainstream a Democrat as I’ve seen. Perhaps he was even a better candidate than Gov. Brian Schweitzer was in 2004. As Schweitzer himself said, Jon Tester is “a hard working, God fearing, red-meat eating, gun-toting Democrat.”

Burns, on the other hand, is under a cloud of suspicion from the Jack Abramoff scandal. He’s insulted fire fighters, women and minorities. He’s supported every policy advanced by the Bush administration. Yet the margin, still give Tester just 2,644 votes more than Burns.

But a win’s a win. Now it’s the Democrats turn to lead: to try and bring the deficit under control, to reign in corruption, to bring some sort of close to the Iraq fiasco and to give the worker bees in this nation a fair shake.

On behalf of Patrick and Suki: Adios, Conrad.
[End of article]

I say "Good Riddance!!!" and "buh bye"

I say piss on Burns!

Sorry, but I can't feel sorry for CRIMINALS! The criminal investigation into Connie's shenanigans with Jack must continue to fruition. Burns broke the law, and he must be held accountable! Burns and his nazi pals are the first to hold welfare mothers accountable. Now, when the tables are turned, Connie himself must be held accountable. He must go to jail for his crimes. The rightwing nazis in this country showed no quarter to even the most downtrodden and deserving. We must now show no quarter to them. Why should we feel sorry for a slimeball like Burns?! They established the rules. Accountability. If it's good enough for welfare mothers, it by God ought to be good enough for mothers like Burns! Send this bum to jail!

I spent the last 10 months working side-by-side with Senator Burns. You're a fool if you think he broke the law or is going to jail (though who would blame you with the foolhardy media playing speculation like fact and free speech like a license to turn public opinion against a good man simply because they disagree with his ideologies).

Senator Burns is a man who only wants what's best for Montana and America. While you may disagree, see if you can comprehend that people who approach policy differently than you still want the best for the population as a whole.

Congratulations to Senator Tester, because I have the ability to lose with some grace. Thanks for your almost-graceful sentiments in the article. I hope the commentors aren't really as stupid as they present themselves.

Did Burns care about what was best for the population of the Marianas Islands? Perhaps the fact that these people aren't "Americans" doesn't matter to you (or him). That is quite an "idealogy".

Did Burns care about the flight attendant in fear of losing her job when he told her to stay at home and take care of the kids? Look up the phrase "Res Ipsa Loquitur" if you are unfamiliar with it.

There is no "grace" associated with this election on either side of the aisle. It was the worst I have seen in my years and your simple "congratulations" does not make it better. I am at least thankful that the least objectionable candidate won. I can't believe anyone would be so "stupid" as to stand beside anyone in politics these days and unequivocally say that they have "not broken the law". Do you know how many people surrounding Mark Foley would have proclaimed him to be a "good man" while he fondled young boys?! Do not be so damn naive. 10 months is nothing! You are probably right that he will not go to jail, however. The ball will be dropped as a moot issue now that he is out of office. So much for the great republican plan for accountability. You are the fool if you cannot step outside of your experience with him and realize that the facts that are out there look EXTREMELY suspicious. Politicians are very sly and I am sure Burns is no exception despite his embarrassing foot in mouth antics. Again I say... "good riddance!"

Thanks for the graceful comment, Tim M., but, honestly, how can you not smell the indictments?
Conrad's a crook - it's only a matter of time (and money) as to the degree we will find out exactly how crooked.

Oh, selective memory. Thanks, Bill, for regurgitating Democratic talking points that I've been listening to since...well, since I turned on the radio at the beginning of this campaign.

I'm quite sure Senator Burns had forgotten everyone else when he saved 1500 jobs at the Stillwater mine. I'm sure Conrad Burns forgot everyone else when he brought enough appropriations to Butte to almost single-handedly keep the city alive. I'm sure Conrad Burns was only thinking of himself when he pioneered broadband access in rural Montana. I'm sure Conrad Burns only thought of himself when he built on that success to help create the tele-medicine system in rural Montana. I'm sure Conrad Burns was only thinking of himself when he secured federal dollars to revitalize downtown Billings or rebuild the airport or create 300 jobs at Bresnan Communications. I'm sure Conrad Burns was only thinking of himself when he secured appropriations to build thousands of new housing units at Malmstrom and bring new military projects there.

As long as we're selecting things to forget, why don't we forget that Conrad Burns drives a vehicle no different than mine, that I ran into Phyllis shopping at Target, or that Conrad Burns started out making $135 a month working in a cow camp. He's the same man now that he was then except that he pulled himself up and made himself one of the most well-known (and unfortunately one of the most divisive) people in the state. He still shops where I do and drives what I drive. If I were making deals with lobbyists in some fictitious smoke-filled back room, I'd at least make sure I got a pretty decent new house or car out of the deal.

But you're right on one score. It's unfortunate that politics has degenerated to mud-slinging and name-calling. In fact, I wish it hadn't started over a year ago when the Montana Democratic Party ran negative ads before Senator Burns even had a campaign staff.

Oh...and you miss the mark a little when you compare Conrad Burns--even if the worst accusations are true--to Mark Foley. Although fondled? String Mark Foley up if you want. It won't bother me in the least, but please don't sensationalize just to try to make a point that can't stick. It sounds dumb.

But, the worst accusations aren't true. In six months, you will all have forgotten your ire at Senator Burns, since it's entirely politically motivated--and conveniantly so, so why should I blame you? But after that six months, new political problems will arise, investigators will find nothing, if any are still looking at all, you will forget that the investigations were allegedly going on, and Conrad Burns will get to spend his time quietly enjoying life and his new granddaughter (who is very cute, by the way) without the arrogant, stupid, spiteful, politically-motivated accusations anywhere around him.

I did not "compare" Conrad Burns to Mark Foley and only a partisan political spinster would characterize my comment this way. I was pretty clear in pointing out that it is ridiculous for one to think that simply because one spends 10 months with an individual (politician in particular) that he knows with such certainty that he is "NOT a criminal". You don't know and I don't know. What I do know is that the facts are very suspicious just as all the facts that surrounded Martz's land deal years ago made her look very suspicious. Funny I didn't forget about that... I doubt I will forget about Burns as you have suggested. I do not personally know Conrad Burns. It is ridiculous for those who do to expect others to blindly accept their opinion of a man.

Also, yes... Burns brought home a lot of pork but I thought Jonathan Weber's article about pork was very good. Basically, I recall he was making the point that pork comes at a great cost if it is wrapped up in corruption. I would rather get a freshman in there and keep my hands clean.

I love your "they started it first" (dems) comment about political campaigns. Very funny. Maybe we should look throughout history, add it all up and find out, once and for all, who really started it. Ridiculous.

As for the "smoke-filled back room"... I think it was more likely a posh corporate jet. Thank you for admitting that Burns was "divisive". Even if we assume Burns is one of the finest humans to ever walk the earth, "divisive" is not a positive trait in a politician. It is precisely for this reason I do not want to see Hillary run in '08. I would love to see someone step out of the middle of the road and bring everyone together again. In the meantime, I guess we will just continue to go around calling each other "arrogant, stupid and spiteful". And yes, I know I have perpetuated the same by saying "good riddance". That is how deep the divisiveness runs at this point due to politicians like Bush, Clinton and Burns. The lion's share of blame probably lies with all the extremists that incense us all... the self-righteous, moralistic church going hypocrits and the tree-spiking, illogical, dreadlocked morons.

Touche on the divisiveness comment. Though you should recognize that divisiveness is either a product of alienating a segment of the population or taking principled stands in the face of difficult decisions...which probably go hand-in-hand. I'll say it's not a great quality in a person, but a necessary and nearly unavoidable quality in a leader.

As to pork, well, it's pork when it doesn't touch you personally, but it's beef if you're the one that works at the Stillwater Mine. It's pork if you don't live in Great Falls where your economic engine depends on the vitality of Malmstrom AFB. I find the pork-to-corruption relationship moot, because it depends entirely on whether one buys into what the newspapers spoonfeed one.

As to mud-slinging, yes, let's add up the instances where one party is at fault. ...And the D's jump to an early 1-0 lead. Actually, I'm pointing out an elementary and unfortunate political reality. If a group decides they want to raise your negatives, it's going to happen with the instant media and advertising that surrounds us in the information age. You can either accept it and lose or fight fire with fire and keep yourself in the game. Sadly, the D's lit the fire, the R's stoked it, and the media brought the gasoline, and before you knew it, we had a good old-fashioned book-burning bonfire on our hands where reason and issues meant very little and knee-jerk reactions and hot-button issues controlled the day. Starting from the first negative ads, this campaign was never going to be won on issues. It was going to go to the candidate who did the better job of recruiting people for his party's book-burning.

You probably do hit the nail on the head when you refer to the Grand Canyon of a chasm that separates the extreme right from the extreme left.

As I think about what Burns did to be divisive I must cite the most visible instances... stewardess, firefighters, "ragheads", etc. These instances were hardly examples of a guy taking a principled stand. Rather these are examples of a guy who has very little tact and aforethought as to his actions that are likely to be inflammatory (a la Bush referring to our "crusade" against the terrorists - good God the stupidity is overwhelming) versus those that are likely to be productive. The "raghead" comment from years ago is especially relevant in my mind because I think the events of 9-11 and those that have followed (beheadings, etc.) stir us all deep inside to the point where even the most politically correct of us feel a gut level desire to angrily lash out at the goddamn "ragheads". But, of course, this kind of generalized reaction does nothing but hurt us in the long run by alienating those members of the muslim community that actually could serve as our allies. It isn't much different than someone calling a black man a "n-gger". Chris Rock has a great bit about the "n-ggers" that live among all the black people. Spoken by a white person, however, the same sentiment comes off as racist and would undoubtedly give rise to an understandably negative reaction by the entire black community. I think every politician, in the interest of our country, should be able to avoid using such terms. Burns cannot.

The mud slinging is inherently started by anyone who attempts to unseat an incumbent. For example, I would lay my money on the republicans launching the initial attack when Tester comes up for re-election. Frankly, Burns comment that he "fought the good fight" makes me sick. There was nothing "good" about his fight. Though I would agree more with the policies of Tester, I cannot say that he "fought the good fight" either. It was a bloody disgusting battle riddled with twisted facts, quotes taken out of context and outright lies by both sides. I tried to make the point that attempting to find out and prove "who started it" once and for all is just going to dig our hole deeper and divide us further. We should all just realize that this crap has been going on for a long, long time. Sometimes the R's start it and other times the D's start it. There are no clean hands on this part of the playing field.

I will be the first to admit that the media always loves to throw fuel on the fire but, again, the simple facts surrounding Burns speak to a high degree of suspicion. I will never take someone's word who knows him "personally" and has "worked with him for the last 10 months". To do so would be naive and foolish.

The Grand Canyon is a good metaphor because most of the people get stuck in the hole whereas instead most should be standing on top of a mountain with the extremists barely hanging on to the cliffs that surround us. I don't have much faith that we will ever get back to that point.

Rub-dub-dub everyone in the same tub. Beating each other with their paddles. Floating bloody, bruised, and directionless to nowhere.

Burns is past history. Will Tester follow through and get rid of earmarks and begin the process of cleaning up the process? When will we see his first draft of an attempt to fulfill his promises? What are the first five things he should tackle in order of priority? What should his scorecard look like to track his accountability?

Burns had his chance to do some good things. In fact, he had plenty of chances - and years of service. It's past time for someone else to get the opportunity to work for the people, not corporations and their lobbyists. Congratulations, Mr. Tester

Allright Craig, you've asked for it in several different places and I would be happy to comply.
Top 5: 1)Adopt McCain/Feingold Lobby Reform (30k lobbyist in DC)
2)Adopt a budget that balances (Include War)
3)Reverse President's ability to suspend Habeas Corpus and repeal the Patriot Act
4)Streamline FBI,CIA, Homeland Security, NSA, etc.
5)Admit Global Warming is an issue and readdress Kyoto Treaty

Next 5: 6)Listen to the Generals in Iraq and Afganistan
7)Raise Social Security Age (program established for collection at age 63 when life expectancy was 64)
8)No more PORK. Appropriations are a joke. If you want something, you pay for it through taxes or philanthropy.
9)Provide real incentives to energy companies to produce alternative fuels not token tax relief
10)Stop selling the US to China (China has $1Trillion surplus and it's all us (US).

Off the top of my head, but important to me. Tried to stay away from those few divisive issues that usually fall back on religion.
How about you?

I wonder , were to find boyfriend to my sister? Joke:)
My online friends propose this link to use -TOP10 - As for me, I think life is now!!!

You won’t believe your eyes, see the World’s best girls HERE! ......
- LIVE CHAT - ATTANTION ! Adult only !......
_________________________________
http://girlsforlove.tripod.com