Posted on 10/10/2008 9:38:51 PM PDT by Maelstorm
Republican challenger Steve Sauerberg accused incumbent U.S. Sen. Dick Durbin of endangering troops in Iraq by criticizing the treatment of prisoners at Guantanamo Bay, prompting an outraged response from Durbin as the two debated Thursday night.
''I don't know where the bottom is anymore in your campaign. Why don't you debate the issues?'' Durbin said. ''Common decency still works.''
''It does still work,'' Sauerberg shot back, ''and you should have shown it in your remarks about our troops.''
The two also differed sharply on how to respond to the nation's economic turmoil, with Sauerberg calling for corporate tax cuts and minimal government regulation. Durbin defended the recently approved $700 billion bailout package and said Congress should do more to minimize future busts in the financial system.
(Excerpt) Read more at suntimes.com ...
Finally, the pussy left is learning that the rest of us are P!SSED and not going to put up with it anymore.
And we find few things more outrageous than these sniveling, conniving cowards endangering our brave military.
What is unfortunate is that if the national party had had its act together some of these races would be in much better shape. The public aren’t just upset with Republicans they are upset with the whole congress.
Negative comments are running about 12 to 1.
We can only hope.
''It does still work,'' Sauerberg shot back, ''and you should have shown it in your remarks about our troops.''
Nice comeback!
(God help me living in this Godforsaken state with Durbin and NObama as my senators!)
This is a duplicate thread. The exact same article was already posted here:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2102063/posts
Please lock this thread.
Sauerberg got him good. I wish we were at this point a month two months a go. What eats me is we have good candidates running but sadly they are defined by the how much money they can raise. I believe that we do need campaign finance reform but what John McCain overlooked is something I’ve been thinking about. Why aren’t national candidates required to debate once every quarter in an election year? Also there should be a requirement that the debates be televised locally within their district and stations that use public airwaves should be required to air them or else lose their license.
These incumbents act as though their challengers don’t exist and both parties are guilty of it and the citizens deserve more than a duck and hide incumbent who shows up for a thinly televised debate in the last month before the election.
Yes, Maelstorm, as evidenced by the fact your boy Sauerberg was annointed by the RINO establishment in Illinois and spent the primary season referring to himself as "THE Republican candidate for Senate" as IF he had already won the nomination, and REFUSING to debate the other two Republicans on the ballot by pretending they didn't exist.
Sauerberg has likewise spent most of the general election season ignoring the other three candidates on the ballot, and won't even let the Green Party candidate into the debates, despite the fact it would actually HELP him because she'd draw liberal votes away from Durbin.
After all that, now he whines how Durbin is ignoring him. What Durbin is doing to Sauerberg now is poetic justice. Cry me a river. You reap what you sow, Doctor. Doesn't feel too good to be on the receiving end of a media blackout, does it?
You said, “We have good candidates running.” Who are the good candidates? I know a conservative Chicago politician who told me that Sauerberg is so liberal, he should have run in the democrat primary.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.