<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Justify the opposition to Bud Cramer</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.flashpointblog.com/2007/11/27/justify-the-opposition-to-bud-cramer/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.flashpointblog.com/2007/11/27/justify-the-opposition-to-bud-cramer/</link>
	<description>Politics. Alabama Style.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 15 Mar 2010 03:51:19 -0400</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.6</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Brian</title>
		<link>http://www.flashpointblog.com/2007/11/27/justify-the-opposition-to-bud-cramer/comment-page-1/#comment-22872</link>
		<dc:creator>Brian</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 03 Apr 2008 01:28:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.flashpointblog.com/2007/11/27/justify-the-opposition-to-bud-cramer/#comment-22872</guid>
		<description>&quot;pigs pocket&quot; (aka lots of other names) you asked for it and you got it - you&#039;re now become the first person in my two years of blogging that I had to ban.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;pigs pocket&#8221; (aka lots of other names) you asked for it and you got it &#8211; you&#8217;re now become the first person in my two years of blogging that I had to ban.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: pigs pocket</title>
		<link>http://www.flashpointblog.com/2007/11/27/justify-the-opposition-to-bud-cramer/comment-page-1/#comment-22871</link>
		<dc:creator>pigs pocket</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 03 Apr 2008 01:12:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.flashpointblog.com/2007/11/27/justify-the-opposition-to-bud-cramer/#comment-22871</guid>
		<description>bud Corporate Whore.... is gone and finally a non CHRISTIAN CRUSADER might be elected to tell israel that the fight for Jewsylvania is all theirs. that the USA will no longer send U.S. tax dollars to the 13th richest nation on earth to allow them to continue to act as TERRORIST!

bushlovers be damned......and bud was and is a biblethumping bushlover</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>bud Corporate Whore&#8230;. is gone and finally a non CHRISTIAN CRUSADER might be elected to tell israel that the fight for Jewsylvania is all theirs. that the USA will no longer send U.S. tax dollars to the 13th richest nation on earth to allow them to continue to act as TERRORIST!</p>
<p>bushlovers be damned&#8230;&#8230;and bud was and is a biblethumping bushlover</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: wayne</title>
		<link>http://www.flashpointblog.com/2007/11/27/justify-the-opposition-to-bud-cramer/comment-page-1/#comment-15249</link>
		<dc:creator>wayne</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 30 Nov 2007 14:41:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.flashpointblog.com/2007/11/27/justify-the-opposition-to-bud-cramer/#comment-15249</guid>
		<description>Cramer stinks for the above reasons and that he always slaps his name onto any local project that is looking good so he can claim credit.  (See the Lincoln Village Project in Huntsville.)  He also gives out my money and then acts as if it came from his own pocket.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Cramer stinks for the above reasons and that he always slaps his name onto any local project that is looking good so he can claim credit.  (See the Lincoln Village Project in Huntsville.)  He also gives out my money and then acts as if it came from his own pocket.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: walt moffett</title>
		<link>http://www.flashpointblog.com/2007/11/27/justify-the-opposition-to-bud-cramer/comment-page-1/#comment-15198</link>
		<dc:creator>walt moffett</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 29 Nov 2007 23:53:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.flashpointblog.com/2007/11/27/justify-the-opposition-to-bud-cramer/#comment-15198</guid>
		<description>Main reason to oppose Cramer is that competition improves the breed.  An incumbent without credible opposition can get lazy and develops a tendency to view his interests and the districts as the same.  When forced to compete for votes (and local fund raising) he has to pay attention to local matters.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Main reason to oppose Cramer is that competition improves the breed.  An incumbent without credible opposition can get lazy and develops a tendency to view his interests and the districts as the same.  When forced to compete for votes (and local fund raising) he has to pay attention to local matters.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Lee P</title>
		<link>http://www.flashpointblog.com/2007/11/27/justify-the-opposition-to-bud-cramer/comment-page-1/#comment-15181</link>
		<dc:creator>Lee P</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 29 Nov 2007 20:43:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.flashpointblog.com/2007/11/27/justify-the-opposition-to-bud-cramer/#comment-15181</guid>
		<description>Wow, you&#039;ve got a good spam blocker!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Wow, you&#8217;ve got a good spam blocker!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Brian</title>
		<link>http://www.flashpointblog.com/2007/11/27/justify-the-opposition-to-bud-cramer/comment-page-1/#comment-15165</link>
		<dc:creator>Brian</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 29 Nov 2007 17:21:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.flashpointblog.com/2007/11/27/justify-the-opposition-to-bud-cramer/#comment-15165</guid>
		<description>Lee - my spam blocker trapped your initial comment...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Lee &#8211; my spam blocker trapped your initial comment&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Lee P</title>
		<link>http://www.flashpointblog.com/2007/11/27/justify-the-opposition-to-bud-cramer/comment-page-1/#comment-15115</link>
		<dc:creator>Lee P</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 29 Nov 2007 06:56:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.flashpointblog.com/2007/11/27/justify-the-opposition-to-bud-cramer/#comment-15115</guid>
		<description>See my latest blog post for a reply.

- Lee P</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>See my latest blog post for a reply.</p>
<p>- Lee P</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Lee P</title>
		<link>http://www.flashpointblog.com/2007/11/27/justify-the-opposition-to-bud-cramer/comment-page-1/#comment-15111</link>
		<dc:creator>Lee P</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 29 Nov 2007 06:38:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.flashpointblog.com/2007/11/27/justify-the-opposition-to-bud-cramer/#comment-15111</guid>
		<description>Nope, that&#039;s not it.  I&#039;ve responded on &lt;a href=&quot;http://abamablog.blogspot.com/2007/11/whats-wrong-with-bud-cramer.html&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;my blog,&lt;/a&gt; and here&#039;s a summary:

1. Cramer voted against funding for the &quot;surge&quot; of troops into Iraq, which has been an integral part of Gen. Petraus&#039;s revamped counterinsurgency strategy, a strategy that has succeeded beyond almost anyone&#039;s expectations.

2. Cramer has also consistently voted in favor of forcing the withdrawal of U.S. forces from Iraq in accordance with artificial timelines drawn up by Congressional Democrats. Most recently, on November 14 (just two weeks ago) Cramer voted in favor of a DOD supplemental appropriations bill that would force the President to begin withdrawing troops from Iraq within 30 days of the bill&#039;s enactment. That bill has since been vetoed by the President, and funding for the war effort in Iraq and Afghanistan remains unresolved.

3. Last April, Cramer voted for the District of Columbia House Voting Rights Act of 2007, which would grant the District of Columbia a vote in the the House of Representatives and a vote in the Electoral College. It also would be a clear violation of the U.S. Constitution, which says in Article 1 Section 2 that House members are to be &quot;chosen every second year by the people of the several states.&quot; Last I heard, D.C. is not a state.

4. Last month, Cramer voted for the Native Hawaiian Reorganization Act of 2007. Anyone who finds the idea of race-based preferences distasteful will find this piece of legislation outrageous. Essentially, it would authorize the creation of a sovereign, race-based government for native Hawaiians.

5. Last February, Cramer voted for the Union Organization Bill, which among other things, eliminates workers&#039; rights to a secret-ballot election when voting on whether to form a union.

6. Last June, Cramer voted to provide federal funding for embryo-destructive stem cell research. One would hope that after last week&#039;s announced breakthrough, this will cease to be an issue in the future. Nonetheless, Cramer&#039;s support for this bill is disturbing for three reasons: 1) he gave his blessing to research that involves the destruction of human embryos, 2) he has no objection to allocating federal tax dollars to research that is ethically questionable, and 3) he has no qualms with the federal government handing out money to anyone for any purpose, as long it is politically popular; the constitutional authority granted to Congress under Article 1 apparently plays little role in his decision making.

7. Last January, Rep. Cramer voted to choose Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D.-San Francisco) as Speaker of the House. Need I say more?

...I could go on and on. In 2002, Cramer voted in favor of the McCain-Feingold Bipartisan Campaign Finance Reform Act, which is quite possibly the greatest affront to the First Amendment since the Sedition Act of 1798. In 2005, he opposed President Bush&#039;s plan to create voluntary private investment accounts inside the Social Security system. In 2006, he voted against requiring voters in federal elections to present a government-issues photo ID.

That&#039;s just the tip of the iceberg.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Nope, that&#8217;s not it.  I&#8217;ve responded on <a href="http://abamablog.blogspot.com/2007/11/whats-wrong-with-bud-cramer.html" rel="nofollow">my blog,</a> and here&#8217;s a summary:</p>
<p>1. Cramer voted against funding for the &#8220;surge&#8221; of troops into Iraq, which has been an integral part of Gen. Petraus&#8217;s revamped counterinsurgency strategy, a strategy that has succeeded beyond almost anyone&#8217;s expectations.</p>
<p>2. Cramer has also consistently voted in favor of forcing the withdrawal of U.S. forces from Iraq in accordance with artificial timelines drawn up by Congressional Democrats. Most recently, on November 14 (just two weeks ago) Cramer voted in favor of a DOD supplemental appropriations bill that would force the President to begin withdrawing troops from Iraq within 30 days of the bill&#8217;s enactment. That bill has since been vetoed by the President, and funding for the war effort in Iraq and Afghanistan remains unresolved.</p>
<p>3. Last April, Cramer voted for the District of Columbia House Voting Rights Act of 2007, which would grant the District of Columbia a vote in the the House of Representatives and a vote in the Electoral College. It also would be a clear violation of the U.S. Constitution, which says in Article 1 Section 2 that House members are to be &#8220;chosen every second year by the people of the several states.&#8221; Last I heard, D.C. is not a state.</p>
<p>4. Last month, Cramer voted for the Native Hawaiian Reorganization Act of 2007. Anyone who finds the idea of race-based preferences distasteful will find this piece of legislation outrageous. Essentially, it would authorize the creation of a sovereign, race-based government for native Hawaiians.</p>
<p>5. Last February, Cramer voted for the Union Organization Bill, which among other things, eliminates workers&#8217; rights to a secret-ballot election when voting on whether to form a union.</p>
<p>6. Last June, Cramer voted to provide federal funding for embryo-destructive stem cell research. One would hope that after last week&#8217;s announced breakthrough, this will cease to be an issue in the future. Nonetheless, Cramer&#8217;s support for this bill is disturbing for three reasons: 1) he gave his blessing to research that involves the destruction of human embryos, 2) he has no objection to allocating federal tax dollars to research that is ethically questionable, and 3) he has no qualms with the federal government handing out money to anyone for any purpose, as long it is politically popular; the constitutional authority granted to Congress under Article 1 apparently plays little role in his decision making.</p>
<p>7. Last January, Rep. Cramer voted to choose Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D.-San Francisco) as Speaker of the House. Need I say more?</p>
<p>&#8230;I could go on and on. In 2002, Cramer voted in favor of the McCain-Feingold Bipartisan Campaign Finance Reform Act, which is quite possibly the greatest affront to the First Amendment since the Sedition Act of 1798. In 2005, he opposed President Bush&#8217;s plan to create voluntary private investment accounts inside the Social Security system. In 2006, he voted against requiring voters in federal elections to present a government-issues photo ID.</p>
<p>That&#8217;s just the tip of the iceberg.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Brian</title>
		<link>http://www.flashpointblog.com/2007/11/27/justify-the-opposition-to-bud-cramer/comment-page-1/#comment-15100</link>
		<dc:creator>Brian</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 29 Nov 2007 04:22:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.flashpointblog.com/2007/11/27/justify-the-opposition-to-bud-cramer/#comment-15100</guid>
		<description>So that is it?  I got quite a bit of traffic to this specific post today and the sum total of the reaction is that he &quot;votes to cut and run.&quot;  I guess Bud should sleep easy.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>So that is it?  I got quite a bit of traffic to this specific post today and the sum total of the reaction is that he &#8220;votes to cut and run.&#8221;  I guess Bud should sleep easy.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Reactionary</title>
		<link>http://www.flashpointblog.com/2007/11/27/justify-the-opposition-to-bud-cramer/comment-page-1/#comment-15031</link>
		<dc:creator>Reactionary</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 28 Nov 2007 14:31:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.flashpointblog.com/2007/11/27/justify-the-opposition-to-bud-cramer/#comment-15031</guid>
		<description>He votes to cut and run.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>He votes to cut and run.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
