Posted: July 22, 2012 at 7:04 pm
Steve Daines Finally Speaks His Mind
Rick Santorum joined Steve Daines for a fundraiser in Cascade on Sunday. Santorum is the GOP presidential candidate who promised a war on pornography if elected. Daines refused to say if he agrees with Santorum’s priorities. For that matter, Daines hasn’t said what he wants to do about education, the budget, and other important issues Montanans care about.
It turns out that anyone who wants to know what Steve Daines thinks was looking in the wrong place. His Twitter account (@steve_daines) is an unfiltered look into this man’s productive and inspired mind. The screenshot pasted below includes a few of this thoughts:
While I wouldn’t recommend that you type in any of these links if you’re at work (or even if you’re at home), the tweets do finally shed some light on Steve Daines’ vision for Montana. Apparently, that vision consists of cheap internet LOLZ and work-from-home scams.
This kind of razor sharp focus on such important priorities would make Daines a great replacement for Dennis Rehberg–but a second Dennis Rehberg is the last thing voters want.
Steve Daines is like Rehberg, only way more uber-religious. He’s the kind of dead-eye uber-religious from some kind of cult movie. So, he probably does support the war on porn. As to his tweets. I’m guessing he got into something that he didn’t know was tweeting his internet activity. At least now we have an explanation of the kind of thing Daines is trying to hide by all his google search burial spam sites.
actually, I think this is his way of trying to appear approachable or like a real person. daines has a similar problem with romney in this regard. it appears he is so out of touch with what regular people talk about that this is his best attempt.
Daines’ religiosity borders on frightening, but his bigger problem is that he is always at risk of being outwitted by a jar of Marshmallow Fluff. We just got rid of Conrad Burns, let’s not do it again.
I don’t mean that religion is bad, I mean that Daines has it in a bad way. He takes it to the wrong level.
Folks, if God had wanted Rick Santorum to speak for him, he would have made Santorum intelligent. So…
Rehberg’s has wasted Montana’s only opportunity for representation in the House for more than a decade. It’s like we’ve had no representation at all, he’s been so ineffective. Time for a change–and not another dimwit.
Our future congressman wow Im impressed, not, but hey I dont like the alternative either.
Daines is using content farms to bury his past internet activity so that it doesn’t come up on google.
http://intelligentdiscontent.com/2011/07/21/what-does-steve-daines-have-to-hide/
What you so casually dismiss as “work-from-home scams” is actually Steve Daines job creation platform. How dare you criticize this man’s honest effort to bring “Jobs for Montana.” ~snark~
Is this porn? I’m not going to click on the links as I’m in a public place…I mean, one of the tweets says:
“look what she’s doing to him!”
Am I the only one to notice that Daines has only 17 Twitter followers?
http://crooksandliars.com/susie-madrak/where-do-mitts-new-twitter-followers-
Sounds like something Steve Daines would do.
In the words of Jim Hightower, “If the Gods would have wanted us to vote they would have given us candidates.” Unfortuantly this office its like the South Park episode where you have to chose between a Giant Douch and a Turd Sandwich. That is why Steve Danies has 17 followers on twitter is cause he is the Giant Douch, I’d like to know what the Turd Sandwich has for followers but oh well. And so this race just does not get me excited, and I dought others are excited as well.
Are you calling Kim Gillan a “turd sandwich”? Why?
I certainly wouldn’t presume to answer for farmboy but, for me, I might not use the term “turd sandwich” but she is certainly not very inspiring. I have always seen Kim as kind of an insider and not very engaging. She talks the “politics” and not either reality or “real” conversations like some of the other candidates did. About the only reason I have to get excited about voting for her is that she is NOT Daines. Personally, I would have much rather seen one of the more charismatic and “in touch” candidates get the nod in the primary. I think watch Kim is pretty much like watching paint dry.
What I was saying was this election for Montana’s lone representative in congress is like the South Park episode where they had two candidates, it was for school mascot, one was a Giant Douch, the other was a Turd Sandwich, and then Stanley did not want to vote for either, so the whole town tied him to a horse, put a bucket over his head, and banished him from the town. He ended up at the PETA colony, and had to ask the goat to live there, then Puff Daddy who was running his “Vote or Die” campaign came in to kill Stan for not voting, and one of the PETA folks threw blood on his fur coat, so he and his posse, killed all the PETA folks, and then they went back to being the South Park Cows. The reason I say that Kim Gillian is the Turd Sandwich and that Steve Danies is the Giant Douch has nothing to do with either person persoanally, its a statement on voting the lesser of two evils, which I am sick and tired and fed up with doing. So yes Im calling Kim Gillian a Turd Sandwich, cause she is a crappy candidate.
I have to admit I’m not up on cartoon shows, so I’ll take your word for what happened in the episode you mention. But please tell me this: what actual harm would Kim Gillan do to Montanans if she were elected? Is this harm, if you can identify any (which I seriously doubt), about the same in your opinion as the harm Daines might do to us? If this is what you think, please explain.
It’s not a matter in this case of voting for the lesser of two evils. It’s a matter of voting for someone who will do us harm or someone who will stand up to the cabal of dangerous fanatics who’ve gained a temporary advantage in the congress.
Though the metaphor is cute, and I know and love Trey Parker and Matt Stone for their comic genius of South Park. I gotta say Richard is right about this.
Kim wasn’t my first choice for Democrats but she has an extraordinary record in Montana’s congress. And will do nothing but good for this state. Daines has no real experience, and is very much a part of whats is deftly wrong with the RW GOP!
By the Way I am more a Seth MacFarlane’s kind of gal.
Norma I like Seth MacFarlane as well. I guess my problem with Kim is that I dont think she is ready to serve in congress at the national level. I think she will just vote the party line and never think for herself, or her state, and finally being from the eastern side of the state I think we out by the North Dakota line will be ignored in the halls of congress if she is elected. Now I can make those same statements about Steve Danies as well, that is why this is an election of the lesser of two evils, and Im not playing that game, I’ll either write somebody in or I simply will leave it blank. End of the story
Lets start with what bothers you about her, and what you think needs done for your area. I personally know she has people watching this site… so tell me what you think is needed there. I know that Testers people are coninually monitoring that border region as well. Cause we both think your area needs as much federal aid because of oil boom growth as possible without limitiation. I think Kim feels the same way too!
If were gonna have this kind of boom I think Scwietzer did the right thing in getting montana oils in the pipe as well. My only concern is that we keep farming and nature as intact as we can. And the oil folk are short sided on that approach. their safety measures in case of a spill are still rooted in a lot of old pre 70′s mechanisms. Anyway spit it out!
Norma.. he already did. He stated quite clearly that he felt that she wasn’t ready for a national office and that she would follow a party line vote instead of think for herself (or supposedly her constituants). This is the same problem I have and I expressed it when I called her an insider. It would help if you would actually respond to what he (and I) actually write instead of treating us in a patronizing and demeaning manner.
At Norma, I agree with you and I agree with Schwietzer that yes a Montana pipeline needs to be part of the deal on Keystone XL, At Ken I agree with you was well. But ok I tell you what really bothers me, Ive heard 100 reasons to not vote for Steve Danies, and fine I wont, but now give me a reason to vote for Kim Gillian. I have one vote in McCone County Montana, why should this McCone County man vote for Kim Gillian?
Here is my biggest problem with Kim Gillian, she has no private business experience, or agricultural experience. Basically she has worked in a classroom all her life, which is fine, but it gives you a very narrow view on the world. Whereas Sen. Tester for example has opperated an organic grain farm. Or Governor Schwietzer, he was a soil scientist, build irrigation systems, and ranched before he became governor. I want somebody with a wider view on the world. Also I heard Kim speak once or twice, and I just dont think from listening to those speaches that she is congressional matterial. Then I saw her first ad in the campaign, and it had no substiance. These are my problems, these are the reasons this McCone County Farmboy cant vote for Kim Gillian.
I was a Franke Wilmer supporter, but after talking with Kim on Sat. I feel good about supporting her
This is personal Twitter account, not his campaign account. Not that this makes it non-weird that he’s posting this stuff, but still, it seems he didn’t intend for us to see it.
Yea but seriously, looking at this account… the man has a problem with women….being his equal.
Agreed –how does the fact this is his personal account excuse him in any way.
Dear Public, Kim Gillan will be a fine addition to our DC contingent in Washington. She has the Montana experience we desperately need to get things done. Whats more she is far more articulate, Intelligent, and forthcoming then Daines could ever muster in his entire life.
Not only will she help in expanding jobs in Montana…If you are sick of shenanigans and clowns in the 112th congress, Vote for Gillian. You want your kids to have a great educational future, and be healthy life style vote for her.
Daines is a complete nut case, and in fact will do more damage to this states reputation, then Rehberg has.
What ticks me off more is Daines already seems more then willing to continue the war on woman, the GOP started. I believe he’ll more than happily be a tool for big business as well.
Nope, no Daines we had enough stupidity in congress serving Montana for the last 12 years
Norma, you start off fine with touting what you feel are Kim’s strengths and then you devolve into EXACTLY what Farmboy was talking about – saying that a person should be voting for Kim because Daines is evil. That is the very essence of “lesser of two evils”. What he (and I) are asking is “Can you actually give me a reason to vote for Kim other than that Daines is evil?”. If you can’t, you are proving his point. I am as sick of lesser of two evils as he is, and I have already given you my reasons for being less than excited about Kim…
I’ve got nothing against anyone’s religion, but someone’s religion should NOT be a criteria for elected office. And in fact the Framers of the Constitution felt that religion should NOT be a consideration for office but that people of “good character” be eligible for office.
Politics, especially in Washington, is a brutal game and there’s really only one way to be prepared for it and that’s by spending time in the arena. While business experience is okay, it has little bearing in the political arena. Religion is okay too but, again, it has little to do with creating secular laws. Now more than ever political qualifications count and Kim has the qualifications to be our US Representative.
Exactly
http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/2012/07/michele_bachmann_huma_abedin_james_sensenbrenner.php?ref=fpnewsfeed
Please don’t mistake my being blunt for emotional disagreement or my own being perturbed. It is simply that I see little point in indulging fantasy when the stakes are this high.
Farmboy, of Kim Gillan you write:
You never explain why, except from your confusion over what a national politician is supposed to do. You claim that you are uncertain she will care for McCone county Montana if elected to a Congress that is tasked with national priorities. I hate to sound rude, but I would absolutely not vote for a national politician if they claimed that their concern for McCone county were of higher import than federal legislation. If that’s truly the basis of what makes a candidate “ready” for a role in a legislature, I suggest you focus on your own Montana legislative district. I especially find it irksome that you use that as a basis for a misplaced ‘lesser of two evils’ ~sigh~ and dismissal. How do you think Steve Daines or another would vote for the interests of McCone county, Montana? Do you actually think *that* a baseline of “evil”, their direct concern for you? ‘Cause that’s what it reads like.
When pressed on that point, you fall back on a well worn trope. Kim Gillan doesn’t have “business” or “agricultural” experience, and hence isn’t worthy … somehow. Dallas Reese points this out, but I’ll be more direct. Business experience makes you better at business. It doesn’t make you more compassionate, or empathic, or wise. Neither does agriculture, which is business. What it does, if you’re successful, is make you better at making money. No one does that altruistically. They do it to make more money for themselves. If you want somebody who can be effective at a national level of making law that can benefit the majority of constituants, you really want an experienced legislator. That would be Kim Gillan, with 16 years experience at that very thing. So, before you excuse your own culpability in who represents all of Montana at the national level, you really ought to ask yourself this question: Who will be effective? The guy who’s whole experience is making more money for himself, or the person who’s experience is in working to pass good law? Empathy, compassion and wisdom do not come from vocational experience. They come from who one is as a person first. Jon Tester’s campaign for Senate would never have gotten off the ground without the respect and support of Jeff Ament, a man who knew Jon to be compassionate, empathic and wise. Tester got elected because Pearl Jam knew him to be the real deal as a person, not because he’s just a successful farmer. Experience teaches one the process of a vocation. Respect for achievement gets people’s support, and that is most often given to educators because they’ve damned well earned it. What you’re looking for, Gillan has, and Daines doesn’t.
That’s not voting for the lesser of two evils. It’s a choice between the good and the awful.
Kenneth, I have chided you before and will do so here, because you selectively apply your idea of charisma. You hold one candidate to a standard that you do not hold another to. Gillan didn’t ‘impress’ you. Fine. I don’t think she’s terribly charismatic either. But you carry around a double-standard, bud. You really like Lindeen because she’s authentically honest. I agree. You expect that from Gillan, and her supporters, yet you haven’t once expected or even called for that from Daines.
I’ve met the guy. He is charismatic and completely dishonest. He’s the product of superior marketing, and you completely recognize that. You understand that he would be awful on issues that concern you. Still, you strip gears when it comes to Gillan. Though she favors most every stance that is important to you, she didn’t ‘wow’ you, so you have questions that leave you ~blah~ about her candidacy. I don’t think I need to explain it further. You carry a double standard. You demand that others convince you that you ‘should’ vote for Gillan, as opposed to not voting for Daines, when no one is in a position to convince you to get over your own damned double standard.
Gillan has a voting record. No one should be responsible for forcing it on you. Look it up. She is pro-jobs, she has voted consistently to develop Montana resources in as responsible way as possible. Her priorities have been, and remain, education, employment and growth of Montana’s wealth. She has voted to maintain Montana surplus funds, balance budgeting requirements, protect water supplies and still fund conservation in this state. For these reasons she is not favored by some of Montana ‘progressives’. That alone ought to offer you incentive to research her beyond just your idea of her charisma. Please, quit demanding that others do that for you because you don’t like her ‘presentation’ when you met. Daines would likely impress the hell out of you. As I’ve said, he’s the product of good marketing. Gillan’s marketing is not so good. And this you hold the rest of us responsible for?
In truth, I think this is the only state race that is easy to call. Daines will win. He has too much money, too much excellent marketing, and too much ‘independent’ support from those who haven’t any idea what really being independent is about. And we will simply end up with another Dennis Rehberg, a do-nothing useless representative who votes Republicant 100% of the time until it’s politically convenient not to. Yet somehow or another, this is okay because Gillan didn’t spread the disease in the right way.
Thank you, Rob. That was EXACTLY what I was looking for.
Rob thank you for being blunt, and yes you are right on the national priorities, no I did not ever say she should put McCone County ahead of the national priorties and I would never expect that. But I guess we are all just going to have to agree to disagree on this cause I cant give my vote to Kim Gillian, but at the same time I cant give my vote to Steve Danies. I thought about writing in Brian Schwietzer, but I know that would be a waste of my time. So here is what Im going to do. My vote is for sale, to the highest bidder, I dont want the money, it is for charity, infact it is for the McCone County 100 club, they raise funds for firefighting and ambulance equimpment. Here is what Im going to do, If you and your Democratic friends donate more to the McCone County 100 club then the Republicans, I will vote for Kim Gillian, I’ll eat my words, swollow my pride, suck it up and vote for her. But if the Republicans donate more money to the 100 club then the Democrats, I will vote for Steve Danies. Its that simple my vote is for sale but to a worthy cause, cause to me its like chosing between coke and pepsi, or as I pointed out yesterday a Giant Douch and a Turd Sandwich. I honestly dont give a rats a– who wins, but my vote goes to the highest bidder.
Btw the McCone County 100 Club I believe has an account at McCone County Federal Credit Union, their number is 406-485-2288 you can call to make the donation if you want. My the highest bidder win.
But remember it is only the vote on the congressional race that is for sale, Im keeping the rest cause I do care and I still have some principles.
Im also going to sweeten this deal a bit. I will wear a tshirt with the winning candidates name for one week prior to the election, I will put up a yard sign in my yard one month prior to the election and will not tear it down till after the election, and I will vote for the winning bidders candidate of choice in the November 2012 Montana House of Representatives race. Plus if Kim Gillian or her supporters are the winning bidders, I will not complain about her at all anymore during the election season. There it is all for sale. Lets start bidding.
And here we see why alcohol and the Internet are not necessarily a good idea.
Farmboy, this is the very reason Montana had a corruption law about selling votes….. Sigh
Hey Im doing for a good cause and Im not keeping any of the money, so give me some credit here. Also Im not drinking tonight.
Well the auction is over for my vote, one of the big wig Republicans here in the county donated 100k to build a new fire hall. So out of respect for that old gentalman, Im going to vote for Steve Danies for Congress. Final answer. Yes he is a Giant Douch, but hey I did not like the choices anyway.