It’s disappointing that Childers isn’t carrying the stroke in his party to dissuade his colleagues from passing legislation so detrimental to those in his district.

He voted for Pelosi to be Speaker....that is all that matters.

Childers HAD to vote for Pelosi for speaker, if he wanted to remain a member of the Democratic caucus.  So, to be sure, anyone who voted for Childers for Congress voted indirectly for Pelosi for speaker.  But most voters don’t understand that… I daresay that few voters even knew who Nancy Pelosi was.

This is why I’ve never voted for any Democrat for Congress-- or any other federal office-- and never will.

I recall when George Nethercutt (R) beat Speaker Tom Foley (D) in ‘94; it was the first time since 1860 that a sitting House speaker had lost his House seat.  A lot of voters in that House district in Washington state thought that if Nethercutt won the election, he would be the new House speaker.  Foley had to explain to the voters that if he lost and the Republicans won a majority in the House, Newt Gingrich would be the new speaker.

Dawg, you are right.  The most important vote any representative makes ever is the first vote of the session . . . for that of the leadership.  Childers continues to try and occupy this pro-gun, pro-life (pro-stimulus, anti-stimulus and now anti-cap and trade) Democrat stance that doesn’t exist.  If you are really pro-gun and pro-life you cannot support Nancy Pelosi.  End of story.  If that’s really how you define yourself (which is in every press release he sends), you cannot vote for a leader that is vehemently anti-gun and pro-choice.

The point is that Childers is a member of the Democratic caucus, the majority of whose members are anti-gun and pro-abortion.  Childers could support a pro-gun, pro-life candidate for speaker within the Democratic caucus, but that candidate wouldn’t get to first base.  About all Childers would accomplish would be to make Pelosi mad.  And once the Democratic caucus has picked its candidate for speaker, all of the Democrats are expected to support him/her on the House floor.

When Newt Gingrich (R) was first elected speaker in January ‘95, the Democrats Gene Taylor and Mike Parker both voted “present” instead of voting for the Dem nominee, Dick Gephardt.  But even if they had voted for Gephardt, he would’ve still lost, since the Republicans had the majority.  And I’m sure Taylor and Parker both told Gephardt ahead of time that they were voting “present.”

Interesting tidbit on Taylor/Parker voting present.  I did not know that.

If I’m not mistaken, Taylor didn’t vote for Pelosi until 2006. I know in 2004 he voted for John Murtha.

Pelosi backed “Big Bertha” Murtha against Steny Hoyer for majority leader, the No. 2 post.

Pelosi is originally from Hoyer’s home state of Maryland, but she and Hoyer don’t like each other (I think they have run against each other at least once for a leadership position).

Near the anniversary of Hurricane Katrina in 2006, Gene Taylor hosted a left-wing “lovefest” on the Gulf Coast.  Pelosi and a bunch of other far-left Democratic House members attended.  I watched it live on C-SPAN (Barf!), but I didn’t see any coverage in the Mississippi media.

We can thank Trent Lott for Gene Taylor getting elected in the first place, but that’s another story.

The thing with Childers is that his constituents can never relax.  He voted the “right” way on this bill.  But he voted for the stimulus.  He has made people nervous over card check since he’s received so much money from unions.  He voted to bail out Fannie Mae, but against the Wall street one.  I don’t even remember how he voted on the UAW bailout.  He voted FOR the bill for the gov’t. to be allowed to regulate pay (the one Cavuto nailed the FL Congressman on).

He voted the right way on this bill, but can anybody honestly say it tells you how he would vote next time?  On a similar bill?  Or another subject but equally controversial?

You just never know where this guy is going to land.  With his party?  Or with his consituents?  Way too many times, his constiuents are in conflict with his party.  It’s gotta be exhausting for him.  It’s definitely exhausting for his consituents.  I’m ready for him to be “one and done”.  We need somebody who we can count on all the time and know what to expect from them.  We shouldn’t have to experience this type of suspense over and over and over with where our congressman will land on each issue.

Alan Nunnelee should make this same type of statement when he formally declares, as the R Candidate in Alabama’s 5th District did when talking about D incumbent Parker Griffith: 

“His vote for [Speaker Nancy Pelosi] has rendered almost every other vote Parker Griffith has cast meaningless because his vote for Speaker predetermined the outcome of almost every other vote he has cast or will cast. ... You can’t be a conservative and vote to empower Nancy Pelosi, [Democratic Rep.] Barney Frank and everyone else of their political persuasion.”

http://www.rollcall.com/issues/54_153/atr/36350-1.html?type=printer_friendly

I just received in the mail a slick color 4 page “campaign brochure” from Travis Childers.  The front page has the following:  “Congressman Travis Childers putting our economy back together through fiscal responsibility”.  The top left corner on the address page has Childers mailing address in D.C and Tupelo and “This mailing was prepared, published and mailed at taxpayer expense.”
The entire document is is nothing more than a political advertisement and should not be at taxpayers expense.  I assume it was mailed to all registeered voters in his district.

I agree it’s an abuse of his franking privileges but he has done it before and nothing is ever done.  Remember, this is a guy who wished he could’ve gone to prison in place of his dear friend and business partner, Joey Langston. 

Anybody who feels like that is either so terribly ethically misguided as to be lost on the subject or else, so duplicitous as to be a waste of time discussing with. 

Call and complain about it, from what I hear, they so love to hear such complaints that their campaign staff will sometimes follow up the congressional office complaints with a call of their owns.  Not G-rated calls either.

This is far more than an abuse of franking privileges.  The document has the following language in very small print: “This mailing was prepared, published and mailed at taxpayer expense.” The document has a union printing label and was apparently printed in Flowood, MS.

Good catch, I missed that.  Franking is only the mailing part historically.  Question that you might know the answer to:  but has “franking” been interpreted and expanded to mean by court, regulation, congressional rule, etc.to also cover the “preparation” and “publish” work as well over the years?

I wonder b/c if not, do we not have a blatant prosecutable offense on our hands?

I wonder if it hasn’t been expanded to include “constituent communication” or something like that.  At least that part covered separately under something like that.

To the guy on the street, it’s still clear as hell that the fix is in, but if Childers doesn’t even have the law on his side to do this, that’s a BIG deal imo.

I suspect that the production and printing of this document was paid for from his office funds.  I believe that members of Congress do still have franking privileges for mailing, however, I understand that they each have an office allowance of One Million Dollars ($1,000,000.00) annually.  Committee Chairmen/Women also have additional funds for committee staff, etc.  With 435 members of the U.S. House of representatives and 100 Senators the office allowance alone amounts to $535,000,000.00 annually.

Childers and Taylor are something most people on here are not, winners.

If you guys are really that pissed then get out there and run for anything, dog catcher, precinct captain, school board, city council. Please for the love of God, I double dog dare you. Not that I think you are jack assess, ( I do but it takes one to know one.) , but just to see how unblack and white the world really is. There are the politics of personal relationship, party, getting reelected, district, friendships, etc. You have never made an enemy until you have made a political one. They will hate you for life.

What do you do when?

two richest people in town are locked in blood feud over building a new church and location of its parking lot? It is new Baptist church, and they are mad about location of its parking lot. Guy 2 is First Methodist benefactor next door. They are two biggest churches in town and both are needed to get relected and there is no middle ground here. Chose wisely, either way you are probably screwed.

The GOP congressman son is caught at school with a joint, and the prinicpal calls you asking what to do? No report yet. The congressman is in middle of tight election campaign with a liberal and will lose if this comes out. You ran on anti-drug in school campaign as a family friend lost son to meth use, and your biggest contributor was MADD local chapter founder. Oh and taht reporter is snopping around.

The NRA wants you to support a bill allowing automatic weapons on school grounds, and legalizing armour piecing rounds. The local Sheriff is head of County GOP, and he and your school district both strongly oppose.

Your local hospital, and largest employer in your county calls you in and tells you very bluntly if you support HB’s plan they will run and fund an opponent against you. Next the GOP from state tells you the same thing and will hit you with primary opponent if you don’t tow the line. Finally, local group of doctors tell you to support BH plan while the other big group which was interest with hospital says you better oppose.

They go on and on. Life and politics is not always left vs right conservative vs liberal black vs white. It is much messier than that. Just getting elected requires you to make all kind of deals with the devil that would surprise you.

I’ve forgotten the new deal about franking; it may be best to revist the case of Dan Rostenkowski (D-IL). Remember Rosty?

I did not mean to suggest that Congressman Childers did anything illegal in connection with the mailing.  Only that taxpayers money should not be used for that purpose in that manner.  Nothing wrog with a member of Congress sending constituents a letter or report on what they are doing.  Former Congressman, now Senator Wicker, Congressman Jamie Whitten, Senator Thad Cochran and others have mailed information for years but not of such an obvious political nature.  I think that Congressman Childers certainly has the intelligence to get proper legal advise on what he can do with taxpayer funds.

Hmmmm, I have not seen this “slick” propaganda Chiilders mailed out.  I wonder how he can consider his votes “fiscally responsible”, when the first vote he ever cast was for Pelosi’s leadership team.

The point is that, as a member of the Democratic caucus, Childers HAS to vote for that caucus’s nominees for leadership positions.  If he were to vote for the Republican nominee(s), the Dems would strip him of his seniority, take away his committee assignments, or even boot him out of the caucus.

The Democrats stripped Mississippi Rep. John Bell Williams of 18 years’ seniority for backing the ‘64 Republican nominee for president, Barry Goldwater.

Speaking of Thad Cochran:  while in the U. S. House, he voted to repeal the Hatch Act.  I contacted his office to protest this, and he sent me a wishy-washy letter about it.  Then, when he was running for the Senate in ‘78, he sent me a letter on his House letterhead-- at taxpayers’ expense-- stating his position on gun control.  His vote on the Hatch Act was the only issue about which I had ever contacted him.