Plucked from Labor Pains.org we find this not so startling bit of news about the already less than accessible Carol Shea Porter. It’s no secret Clueless Carol can’t do anything off the cuff. Absent notes, prompts, scripts, or Nancy Pelosi, Carol has no depth on the issues, and lives in fear of constituents who have not been prepped with questions she is prepared to answer.
Along comes this volunteer for Granite Stater’s for Employee freedom who is ultimately told by a Shea-Porter staffer that…
“While I’m around, you will never ask Carol Shea-Porter a question.”
Carol has no problem pocketing loads of cash from unions. Does that mean she’s only working for them now?
I think we can solve this problem by relieving ourselves of Carol and her staffer.
Check out the link. It’s a short, read and worth every second.
The New Media Militia 
Really? Actually, Shea-Porter has more depth on every issue facing the Congress than Jeb Bradley or John Stephen seem to need. Conservative slogans seem to be enough for them.
Now that I’ve read the LaborPains post, I have a couple of other comments. First, why doesn’t LaborPains offer any opportunity to comment? Is there a concern about getting caught up short on their facts?
More important, the idea that this tracker is characterizing himself as a “constituent” is laughable. I was there and saw his act. It was actually a group of protesting sign-holders, not exactly the context for a respectful discussion of issues. No one I saw in that group would have been qualified to assess anyone’s depth on any issues.
In addition, as you must know, Shea-Porter does engage your trackers in discussion whenever there’s a real opportunity. The Stratham Democrat’s picnic a month ago is one example I saw myself.
Why not just engage the issues and highlight the assets of your candidates?
Thanks for the input Bill. I promise to reply in depth as soon as I get a few minutes.
Sorry, I’ll have to do this in pieces. I’m between projects.
(First Reply)
As far as Ms. Shea-Porter’s depth on issues facing congress, we would first need to ascertain that the issues congress is choosing to face have any real value to the average American. A 9% approval rating is hardly a ringing endorsement.
Given that Carol’s personal legisltave accomplishments are less than flattering we are left with mandatory surrender, trade isolationsim, increased taxes, enlarging government, redistributing wealth, empowering our enemies, messing with free markets, short-sheeting the global food supply, and making energy more expensive. I’m sure there are more. These are not issues I want my congresswoman to invest her time on.
And I don’t recall her taking a stand against any of them. She’s voting the party line on almost everything.
So this argument is hardly of much use. You are not exactly providing contrast for her against republicans who rely on “conservative slogans.”
Here’s some slogans I like.
“Less goverment, fewer taxes.”
“Local control not federal Mandates”
“Live Free or Die.”
I clearly lack the necessary depth to be a Democrat.
On to your second point.
Your obviously more familiar with Carol and her response to “trackers” than I am. They are not “my trackers” by the way. And neither are the ones who follow Republicans around.
As to the protesters ability to understand issues, that’s hardly relevant. Protesters are ususally single issue or single topic vultures. Circling the candidate until they see an opportunity. But single issue PACs are no different. Unions load campaign coffers, including Carol’s, specifically to get their voices heard. Is our perception of policy “depth” to then be measured by the number of issues, the way it is presented, or how much cash came with it?
I’d rather see the protesters. It’s much more transparent.
And while I’m sure Carol is engaging with trackers, or constituents alike, so are salesman with customers; that doesn’t mean I want to buy what they are selling. Carol clearly believes she is helping, and I’m not implying that she doesn’t see it that way, or that the people she intends to help may not need the process to work differently, but as long as all of her plans require more government, she and I will never really agree on all that much.