"Few differences emerge in final McKinley-Oliverio Debate"

[Lyric]

Few Differences Emerge in Final McKinley-Oliverio Debate
Party affiliation a bigger difference than position on the issues for 1st Congressional District voters.
By Pam Kasey

MORGANTOWN -- Candidates for the 1st Congressional District seat in the House of Representatives tried to distinguish themselves Oct. 28 in Morgantown in the last of three debates before the Nov. 2 election.

(snip)


While the two spoke about their approaches to a balanced budget, it was unclear that they differ in principle.

McKinley suggested three specific targets for budget cuts: rollbacks in welfare, or Temporary Assistance to Needy Families, a change he said would save $25 billion; reform of the Federal National Mortgage Association and the Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corp., or Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, $30 billion; elimination of IRS agents proposed in the health care reform bill, $15 billion over 10 years.

Oliverio’s take on balancing the federal budget would pay for programs that he considers fundamental — Social Security, Medicare, defense, infrastructure — and cut programs or aspects of programs that are discretionary.

http://www.wboy.com/story.cfm?func=viewstory&storyid=88592

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

It was probably a smart thing for Oliverio to avoid detailing, by name, the programs that he considers "discretionary". I have a feeling that they're probably the same ones that McKinley wants to cut, with a few wonderful anti-woman, anti-gay, anti-poor people, anti-environment additions. Mark my words and remember that you heard it here first: Mike Oliverio (D-WV) is going to be one of the most hated-by-DU congressmen that we've ever seen. When he has his first attention-whoring, right-wing-fellating showdown with Pelosi & Co. over something even more obnoxious than the Stupak crap, and everyone here is foaming with rage, please try not to blame northern West Virginians. This is the only choice we were given by the Democratic Party here, in West Virginia's MOST liberal district, and one of the only places in the state where Obama beat McCain at the local polls. We WOULD have voted for an Obama-esque liberal. We COULD have sent someone to Congress that the President could actually WORK with. But we weren't given that choice. The only option we had was Oliverio--Bush's buddy and Alito's biggest chamption.

PLEASE do not blame us. This whole mess can be squarely laid at the feet of the party leadership. The cuddling-up-with-DINOs nonsense has got to stop. Not ALL districts that are represented by DINOs are red. But the party keeps pretending that "red state" = "run a DINO candidate". They're looking at state voting patterns instead of district ones. The two most populous counties in our smallish district went for Obama this past election. Now the people of those counties are being forced to vote for a man that's almost indistinguishable (position-wise) from his Republican opponent. Morgantown is the biggest and wealthiest city in northern West Virginia--and it's solidly blue--but we never had the chance to be the backbone that a true progressive candidate could have built a campaign around. I've heard time and time again that the proper venue for pushing progressive candidates is during the primary. Well, we had nothing but DINOs to choose from in the primary. We weren't even given the chance THEN to choose someone better-suited to working with the President.

Please, please don't blame us. Blame the DNCC and the party leadership in Charleston. This is THEIR mistake. Not ours.