The Process for Senate Appointment, that the GOP is so Curious About….

Here are the answers to the questions that the GOP is asking right now about the process for the senate appointment.

They are very easy.

First, the answer is yes, the process is very transparent.   The governor is going to select from the group of people who are running for the Senate seat.  If someone hasn’t already made the decision to campaign for it, then that’s probably not a person who should be appointed.  A person must want to serve badly enough to make the long slog, shake hands, talk to the voters, and make the case.

Thus there are four names for the governor to consider.

First is Steve Daines.   Mr. Daines voted to shut down the U.S. Government last autumn, which meant that our national parks got shut down as well as well as all federal offices in Montana. This cost the Montana economy tens of millions of dollars in productivity, at a time when the nation is still experiencing a recession.   Our economy, especially in places like Bozeman and Whitefish, depends partly on tourism and it is a critical piece.   We can’t have a Senator that is playing childish games like that, playing chicken with our economy.

Nor do we need a person who made $24 million selling out his shares in a company that is now trying to outsource most of the jobs to foreign workers.  So unfortunately Mr. Daines is eliminated.

Next is John Bohlinger.  He is a man admired and respected all around, and would make an excellent Senator.   But Mr. Bohlinger only raised $10,000 in four months of campaigning, so this must be taken a sign that citizens don’t view him as the right person for the job at this time.

Third is Dirk Adams.  He is a good man with some interesting ideas (seriously check out his issues page) but he comes from a sector of the American economy that has more access to Congress than all the other industries combined: Wall Street.  So while Mr. Adams’s achievements in investment banking should be admired and respected, and while he can definitely contribute to the dialogue going forward, he’s probably not the right person to be our senator at this time.

Finally, we have John Walsh.  John is a war hero and forest fighting hero.  Of the three candidates, he’s the only one who spent most of his career making money with his hands and feet, physically exerting himself to exhaustion to bring home a paycheck.   And he risked his life to do it.  He’s also the only one who has been a leader of a large organization, not only the National Guard but his battalion in Iraq.  And he’s done an excellent job as lieutenant governor.

So that’s the process that the GOP is so curious about.

Next question?

Posted: February 3, 2014 at 6:59 am

23 thoughts on “The Process for Senate Appointment, that the GOP is so Curious About….

  1. W.H.

    Walsh is the best of several good options – Daines is obviously a problem as he shut down the government and votes the TEA Party line – that’s not going to work in a two party system. I’m glad this site hasn’t degenerated into the eat our own kind of candidate bashing that some of the other blogs are engaged in.

    The civil war the GOP is currently embroiled in exemplifies what that kind of think does to a party’s brand.

  2. Bob Brigham

    Hopefully Bullock will have the brains to disregard your badly mistaken assumption that he should choose from those running.

    What Bullock should focus on is appointing somebody who can hit the ground running, who knows DC and can effectively represent Montana until voters decide the direction we want to take in the next election.

    This is the biggest decision Bullock will make, hopefully he doesn’t blow it. Bloggers giving him crap advice is not in his best interests nor in the best interests of Montanans.

    Let’s all pray he doesn’t fuck this up.

    1. Pogie

      The best part of this comment (repeated ad nauseum) by Mr. Brigham, is the idea that the candidate he is being paid to represent isn’t qualified for the Senate. If his contention is that Mr. Bohlinger won’t be able to “hit the ground running” or “represent Montana effectively” in February, why in the hell would he be in November.

      It’s beginning to make a lot of sense why the Bohlinger campaign hasn’t raised enough for a serious state Senate bid.

  3. Jan Thomas

    If anyone is listening to bloggers instead of making up their own minds on this election, that’s a problem. No offense. Blogs are a good source of information, but I wouldn’t use them to tell me how to live my life. I too think we have some good options, but I’m voting for Bohlinger as he stands for civility and the fact that he’s been a Republican and is now a Democrat will give him a better ability to work across both sides of the aisle.

  4. Gumbo

    @brigham: i think cowgirl is providing a script on the assumption that bullock has already decided walsh is his man. and we have to assume he has decided, because if hed alteady decided against walsh and in favor of a place holder then walsh woulda premeptively come out, earlier, and said he wasnt interested. but walsh said last month that he is in fact interested which is the proof that the decision has been made. comprende?

  5. Kevin D Curtis

    I’m still hoping Bullock will appoint Rep. Amanda Curtis. She could show Montanans what actually happens in the Senate each and every day just like she did during the last MT Legislative session. The GOP could not accuse the Gov of any inside deals or playing favorites. With no fundraising demands and not seeking to be elected she could be brutality honest and crack open Government for all Montanans like none before. The thousands of the young people who watched her daily videos would be paying attention to the race for this Senate seat from day one. As she exposes how harmful a GOP led Senate would be for Montana and the U.S. I bet we would never elect a Republican or Tea Party member to a national position again. And the $14,000 a month pay check that a Senator “earns” might be nice for a bit….we could paint our house, pay down some college debt and medical bills (wow it’s 14k a month!)
    I would be willing to also bet, if appointed, Amanda would be the absolute least wealthy member of the U.S. Senate by far, which would be quiet a novelty these days. Do it Bullock! Appoint the girl from Butte! It would be so fun to watch!

    1. Turner

      Amanda would be a terrific choice!

      So would Dirk Adams, the only announced candidate for senate, D or R, who isn’t sucking up to Big Oil and pushing for the Keystone XL pipeline.

      Walsh has joined Daines in cheerleading for this potentially disastrous project. I’m done with him.

  6. Craig Moore

    Here’s where Adams stands on the issues. http://www.adamsformontana.com/issues

    Here’s Walsh. http://johnwalsh2014.com/act/join-the-campaign/?sc=ad_g_s_mt-search-hp_name_av1 and here http://ontheissues.org/Senate/John_Walsh.htm

    I think Montanans appreciate someone that leads from the front like Adams. Walsh is an ethically challenged tabula rasa waiting for his party handlers to tell him what positions to take. The voters are not uniformed soldiers that have to take orders and salute the colonel. Political leadership is a FAR different challenge than relying on rank.

  7. James Conner

    Bullock has endorsed Walsh. And Walsh has boxed-in Bullock by publicly revealing he’d like to be appointed senator. Unless Walsh now publicly says Bullock should appoint a placeholder — for example, Pat Williams — Bullock cannot appoint someone other than Walsh without appearing to undercut his endorsement of Walsh. That’s how the selection process works in practice.

  8. Richard Miller

    Walsh has been nutted by Lee Enterprises and MTN. Daines is a corporate shill and really doesn’t represent anyone in Montana other than his dog. Bollinger is considered two faced because of his party switch but is a rather honorable man (who should, after all of his years of hard work, just retire and enjoy the life he has left).
    I know Jeff the Assman would love to have his buddy Mr. Priest (just a bit handicapped at present, being in jail and all) considered.
    Any name will do as long as it causes the repugs and especially Mr. Assman heartburn.
    juz sayin’

    1. Craig Moore

      To borrow your term, Walsh has been “nutted” by his own deceit by hiding the Army’s Letter of Reprimand from voters in 2012. It took a FOIA request to pry it out. Perhaps it will take FOIA requests to get Walsh’s positions on the issues as well.

  9. In2it

    Bohlinger, having raised only $10,000, demonstrates that

    …citizens don’t view him as the right person for the job at this time.

    Man I love the way you play with words. We all know where Daines and Walsh get their money. Citizens, my ass.

      1. In2it

        I rarely struggle for words, but Cowgirl’s blatant hypocrisy there left me caught short. That is the depravity, bankruptcy of our political system in a nutshell – she thinks the money boys = “citizen” support.

    1. In2it

      What on earth makes you think that BS is different? Any senate seat is bought by money, and Montana with its low population is considered a “cheap buy.” Once in office, a Senator is no more free to push his agenda than a priest to go after the Vatican.

      I know what it is – BS is good with cameras, a smooth promoter, folksy and homespun. He’s the same wine as the others, a more colorful label.

Comments are closed.