Posted: June 1, 2012 at 6:36 am
Montana Needs the Most Experienced Candidate to Defeat Tim Fox, Break Barriers
Facebook COO Sheryl Sandberg gave a talk recently about how there are too few women leaders. She said that out of 190 heads of state, nine are women. Out of all of the worlds parliaments 13% are women. In the corporate sector, women at the top in C-level or board positions top out at 15-16%. Sandberg says that even in the nonprofit sector, a place we think of having a lot of women leaders, we see the same thing. Only 20% of non profits are led by women. These are sobering statistics. But, at least when it comes to elected office, we have the power to change them.
Pam Bucy gives us the opportunity to elect a woman become Montana’s Attorney General for the first time in state history–one of only six in the U.S.
Bucy is the best candidate to go up against Tim Fox in the general election. First because women make up more than half the population. They vote more often than men–both in primary and general elections. Having a woman on the ticket will help turn out women voters–and that helps all democrats because women are much more likely to vote for them than for Republicans.
But the greatest reason that Pam Bucy is the best candidate to put against Tim Fox is her vast legal experience.
Bucy has been an attorney in private practice. She’s been the Chief Legal Council for the Montana Department of Labor–an agency with more than 600 employees. She spent four years as a county prosecutor with the Lewis and Clark County Attorney’s Office. For more than seven years she served as Chief Deputy Attorney General to Mike McGrath–the highest law enforcement official in the state– running the Department of Justice. She has been in the courtroom in public and private practice. She has worked with the Legislature. She has managed large agencies, and she has been instrumental in making legal and policy decisions that affect the entire state.
I know Democrats will get behind whomever wins the AG Primary next week, but Pam has the most knowledge and the experience to win in November and to hold the office of Attorney General.
Agreed. Just my two cents.
Pam will make a great Attorney General. I am proud to call myself a supporter. Thank you for the opportunity to comment. Carrie
I’ve already voted for Bucy. I voted for Gillian in the House race and Elizabeth Best for Supreme Court. Talked to a couple of colleagues who said they were crossing over to vote in the GOP primary for Rick Hill for Governor, but I’m not really into that kind of thing.
I disagree but I have already made my stance pretty clear. I think Jesse Laslovich is the better candidate. While I will happily concede that Pam has more legal experience, I do not concede that legal experience alone is the only reason to vote for a candidate. Did Burns have more Senate experience than Jon Tester when they ran against each other? Of course he did. Tester still won and he has proven to be a great Senate member for Montana.
Jesse Laslovich has plenty of legal experience. Regardless of what the Bucy bots would like you to believe, Jesse is a well established attorney with a lot of experience in court defending the citizens of Montana. Moreover, Jesse was the youngest State Legislator in Montana History. His legislative record is excellent. Given his experience working with the Legislature, he would is uniquely qualified for the job of Attorney General.
The reason I am voting for Jesse, though, is that while Pam is really good at touting her background and experience, Jesse talks about what he wants to DO as Attorney General. He is motivated, dedicated and personable. After personally meeting both, I have no reservations at all supporting Jesse Laslovich.
I would add one further point… Voting for a candidate on the basis of that candidate’s sex is no different than voting against a candidate on the basis of that candidate’s skin color. We, as a responcible electorate, should be voting for the best representative for the job. By suggesting that a person should vote for Bucy because it would be cool to have a female Attorney General, you are insulting the intellegence of that responcible electorate. Shame on you.
Good point, Murk.
I’d never vote for anyone based on physical attributes, or whether they’d be the “first” of a certain color. That’s a bad thing — I mean, look at the White House. The fact is, Obama is nothing more than a black Dennis Kucinich…if he were white, he’d have rated in single digits.
Skinner, you would never have voted for Obama because he has a “D” after his name. You are the worst sort of electorate – the partisan hack.
“The fact is, Obama is nothing more than a black Dennis Kucinich”
How, exactly? Obama is no more liberal than any other Democratic president we have ever elected.
What exactly does the phrase “nothing more than a black Dennis Kucinich” mean? Inquiring minds want to know. Why not “another Dennis Kucinich.”
Happy to oblige, HV.
I was watching the early debates in 2008 and poking around looking at voting records, such as the fact that Senator Obama had voted to the left of Bernie Sanders. It struck me that the only difference politically between Dennis and Barack was skin color. Both were way over on one side of the spectrum.
Were Obama white, he’d have been a backbencher in single digits — and Hillary would have been the Democratic presidential candidate.
As for your snipe, Murk, of COURSE I could never vote for Obama, just like I could never, ever vote for Dennis K. Or Hillary. But I did used to vote for Democrats, back when the party was rooted in industrial America, looking for a fair share of the prosperity generated by real work. Real work deserves real wages. But that Democratic party is long dead, replaced by the party of Elizabeth Warren — a snow-white-bread academic pinhead Indian poseur like that Ward Churchill numbskull.
I mean…Obama did bail out industrial America. Does that get him points? And can you name one time he voted to the left of Bernie Sanders?
“But I did used to vote for Democrats, back when the party was rooted in industrial America, looking for a fair share of the prosperity generated by real work. Real work deserves real wages.” Skinflute
Yeah, and I USED to vote Pubbie! bhwhahahahahaaa!
Too funny, Skinflute. You’ve NEVER voted Dem in your life. But for the record, loser, explain in great detail just WHO doesn’t do “real” work in this country? Spoken like a true weasel trying like hell to ingratiate himself to the corporate fascist masters! Hear that giant sucking sound? That’s SKINflute currying favor with his lips!
That’s a really great tactic you’ve got there, dude. Insulting working people who actually WORK for a living! Not real bright I’d say.
But hey, list ten, ONLY ten jobs that folks have that YOU think isn’t “real” work! You are so full of it.
But unfortunately, you lack even the talent for be a good BOOTlicker! You simply anger REAL working people with your horsehit! I have YET to find a job that isn’t “real” work, and I’ve done it all.
You’re a sad case. But the best the fascists have apparently.
WHAT HAPPENED TO SKINFLUTE??? MeTHINKS that he’s done his Elvis impersonation once again and has LEFT the building!
Remember, he longs for the days when Americans did “real work for real wages”. Well, just what the hell does THAT mean? That folks aren’t doing real work?????
Ya know, I get so pukin’ SICK of listening to these rightwing morons spout as to what is and what isn’t real work! EVERY job is real work! Hell, I have YET to find that job where all a guy does is f*ck OFF all day and pick up a check!
Oh sure, I’ve looked like hell for that job, and I’m probably entitled to one at my age. But yet I’m STILL doin’ work that most twenty-five year olds can’t and won’t do! They try some times, and end up puking before noon! And sneaking off and not returning! True story! (what navy SEALs do for physical trainging, I do for work! And enjoyment!)
So, I ask one more time for Skinflute to list only TEN, just TEN, simply TEN jobs that aren’t real jobs consisting of real work, and hence not worthy of real wages! CNA in a nursing home maybe? A Walmart worker? A bus driver? A city worker? A state worker? A painter? A teacher? A day care operator?? Just WHO are these lazy no good bums gettin’ wages for no work? I really, really want’a know!
So, I’ll help. My challenge is open to ANY reetard Teatards who show up here! List’em, or forever look like the fools you are!
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
Should be easy enuff for these moronic, Teatonic inbreds! Right?
p.s. And for the record, folks sometimes ask me what tree work is like. I answer by pointing to the largest cotton wood around saying, “See that tree? Well, I cut and lift every PIECE of that thing at least twice, and some pieces three or FOUR times in one day! Just me and my partner! That’s it! It’s called tree removal! Tree work! And we do it all the time! Day in and day out! In hundred degree heat if necessary. Until the job is done!”
“Now, I challenge YOU to lift ten thousand pounds (or more depending on the tree) in one day in ANY amount of weight! See if you can do it!”
That’s real work! But so is teaching, or ANY occupation! And to claim otherwise is insulting to every working man and woman in this country!
As an attorney and fourth generation Montanan I’m proud to support Pam Bucy. The handwriting is on the wall in the race with Tim Fox. Yesterday morning Tim was proclaiming on MTPR that he’s the most qualified because he has 25 years of legal experience. Who better to take him on than Pam, who has represented the state for years? The AGs office is Montana’s law firm,as such legal experience is the single most important qualification. Most state agencies have experienced lobbyists and in light of the fact that the legislature only meets for 90 days every other year working with the legislature clearly isn’t a top priority. Moreover, there is no meaningful comparison between the ag’s job and the US Senate.
Casting everyone who supports Pam as a “bot” is patently offensive; name calling in any context evidences a lack of good judgment. Debate the issues on the merits not by type casting people. However, we bots are in good company in light of all of Pam’s recent endorsements from Tribal leaders, law enforcement and labor not to mention Dorothy Bradley.
Go Pam go!
The name calling started from Pam’s side. I was a Bucy supporter until I talked to members of 2 groups of endorsers…a health care Union, and the firefighter union who were treated very unfavorably by Pam’s Campaign staff…I was pretty disturbed by her campaign staff comments made to the members of these groups.
She may be right, but the people working for her are not. My primary vote changed from Pam to Jesse because of that.
Tom,
I will say it again… Experience is only part of the equation. I have already stipulated to Pam having more experience than Jesse. It is only one factor that I consider for this (or any) race.
Since you decided to trash all over what I posted, let me add a few things.
As a lawyer, you are aware that the law is suppose to be interpreted on the merits of the argument, not on political, ideological or financial concerns. As such, the Attorney General’s office is one of the worst places in which to launch and ideological campaign. Pam’s constant and strident call for activism for Women’s Rights serves her well – except as a candidate for the Attorney General’s office. I even agree with most of what she says about Women’s rights and would have supported her in a theoretic legislative race.
The problem is that the Attorney General’s office deals with a great deal more than just Women’s rights. Moreover, the Attorney General is expected to be driven by the law, not activism. This issue will hurt Pam in the general election and if you think that Fox will not bring it up, you are not as good a lawyer as you say you are.
Pam does not have the experience Fox has, as you have already pointed out. The same argument you make against Jesse, can be made about Pam in relation to the General Election. I disagree strongly that Pam is any more qualified to win the general election against Fox than Jesse is. Moreover, Jesse talks about more than just his qualifications, something Pam as epically failed at doing.
We are each allowed our own opinion, and while I respect that you have spoken yours here, please do not be offended if we disagree. That is our right. I, for one, think you are wrong.
I’ve voted for Plenty of women this primary but Pam was not on the list. Jesse Was!
I can respect all the reasons listed above. For me, experience is the key. I’ve already voted for Pam, and I am proud to call myself a supporter.
Kenny Miller, God’s own slimeball!
http://www.greatfallstribune.com/article/20120601/NEWS01/120601001/Updated-Commissioner-finds-Miller-violated-seven-campaign-finance-laws?odyssey=tab|topnews|text|Frontpage
Time for Rick Hill to resign.
http://helenair.com/news/local/govt-and-politics/rick-hill-leases-topic-of-martz-era-emails/article_2e8d33b2-ac74-11e1-b7e4-0019bb2963f4.html
Tell your friends”
I for one am sick of this fight between this site and Don’s. Don is starting to look desperate, and it doesn’t look good for any of us democrats. Don claims that the “Bucybots” are picking on Jesse. I’ve looked through all the blog posts and comments, and it seems to me that the Jesse side starts going negative and then the “Bucybots” come back with factual information. Thats not picking on someone.
I will admit that I was a Jesse supporter at the beginning. 2 Things changed my mind. One of them WASNT the horrible attitude Jesse’s CM had towards fellow dems at the Bozeman Democrat training. He was downright rude. However, I’m not the kind of person who will base my vote off of someones staff, people have bad days. I think its absurd for people to do that. I vote the candidates ability to represent me and to do it well. Not what I heard through a friend, who heard through another friend. Thats BS.
The 2 things that changed my mind and have made me a Bucy guy are:
1) I met Pam randomly at a event for another statewide race. She was fantastic, and not this moister the Jesse staff claimed. She was humble, knowledgeable and spoke highly of Jesse. A genuine person. Pam realizes that this doesn’t need to get nasty. At the end of the day we are all democrats, and need to stick together. So that alone tells me that she would never allow her staff to treat people poorly. Regardless or what you may have heard, though the Jesse campaign. Pam doesn’t need to talk about what she wants to go in the AG’s office. She is already doing and has been for 15 years, her record will speak for itself.
2) I won’t vote for Jesse because he is a hypocrite. He says he is for women’s rights, yet votes on a fetal pain bill. He says he is for Unions but, his family is non-union, he says he is for the people, yet is money is coming from oil companies and insurance lobbyists. Sure he is personable. So was Reagan.
So, I guess that makes me a “Bucybot”… and just for that I will be not only voting, contributing, but phone banking, lit dropping, and whatever else Pam will allow me to do from June 6th till November.
you are welcome to join the supporters of bucy. we’re happy to have you. i for one won’t be doing any name calling. i’ve noticed the same thing. when candidate’s supporters don’t want to hold their candidate accountable for their votes or are not offered an explanation or justification for those votes and actions, they attack others instead as “negative campaigners”. it just means they are unable to defend their candidates actions on the merits. here’s to keeping the AG’s office in Democratic hands! lisa
Whats a moister?
I haven’t been able to figure out why Pogreba is so antagonistic towards Bucy. I would never vote for Laslovich because of his votes on the fetal pain bill – its my contention no man should EVER vote on an issue relating to womens’ health – its not their business. And taking money from oil and gas and lobbyists is a sure sign of where his loyalties would lie were he to be elected. The recent comments by the coal lobbyist Todd O’Hair which are so bizarre they should be immediately discounted (they don’t know any of the science relating to coal?) should send up red flags around anyone who takes any money from the fossil fuel industry.
Agreed. We have one woman in this race who is democrat who shares democratic values –and has the experience and expertise to excell at the job! What’s not to love! Go Pam!
Then, simply put, you haven’t been paying attention. Pogie has *not* been antagonistic against Bucy. What has made him antagonistic is the trolling of his website and others by Bucy supporters, mostly anonymous. As a nine year blogger, I can state with some authority that trolling makes any web-owner antagonistic, and it should.
He’s going to cast his vote for Laslovich. For that, you imply that he isn’t paying attention (“The recent comments by the coal lobbyist Todd O’Hair … should send up red flags around anyone who takes any money from the fossil fuel industry.”) You imply that there is something wrong with Don Pogreba, as well as Jesse Laslovich. Both implications are unfounded, silly and as fallacious as hell. Time is limited for me, but give a while and I’ll be happy to list the litany of logical fallacies you commit here. What is important is that you are claiming something about a voter for having a disagreement with you. That’s beyond just distasteful. It’s insulting as hell, and that would be why Pogie exhibits antagonism towards Bucy supporters.
Tomorrow, my wife will vote for Pam Bucy. Pam apparently has the ear of the current Attorney General and next Governor of the State, mostly through favor of the Montana Democratic machinery, such as it is. My wife is impressed with her litigation experience and strong support of women’s issue. Tomorrow, I will vote for Jesse Laslovich. My reasons mirror these, but most especially the second and the last one. It would be very easy for Bucy supporters to level accusations that I am a misogynist, as they have against Laslovich and Pogreba. But I have to ask, if it would be an evil for me to require my beloved to vote my desire, (The Republican way), why is it any less a harm to require that I vote as my wife wishes just because of gender?
The good news is that we are both Wilmer-bots. Part of that is that Franke stands for women’s issues without reservation. Both my wife and I believe that legal support of equality comes from the legislature, as long as we are a nation of laws. It is the job of the Attorney General to defend the law, and support women through that legal defense. It is not the job of the AG to defend laws as they see fit, in support of gender. Our votes cancelling each other as regards the AG race is of small consequence. Calling out folk for their ‘ignorant love of Laslovich and hatred of Bucy’ isn’t of small consequence at all. Please keep that in mind.
Rob, that’s total BS. Don has been casting aspersions towards Bucy without any prior provocation.
Prove it or STFU, Republicant.
While I won’t get as colorful as Rob (he has a wonderful turn of phrase…), I second his statement. In all the online dealings I have seen on the blogs, it has always been Bucy supporters trashing on either those who support Jesse or Jesse himself. They have accused Jesse of not having any legal experience (that is just shear stupidity), being bought by corporate interests, hating women (or at the very least, not caring about women’s issues) etc. Please link to a case where a Jesse supporter “cast aspersions toward Bucy without prior provocation”.