Turbak: Vote for me because you’re fat, and not worth the money?
Check out this ad from Nancy Turbak-Berry:
Huh?
Did ANYONE understand this ad?
First off, “Stop spending dollars on problems that should have been avoided in the first place“ What’s that supposed to mean? That your problems are your own fault, and you’re not worth spending money on? In the same breath that she’s telling us she wants to take bold initiatives to encourage healthy lifestyles among all of us.
Has anyone ever seen “a bold initiative” that doesn’t cost money? Even meaningless legislative resolutions have an expense. I had never seen an example of conflicted nanny-statism, until now.
And, would someone care to tell us if an ad like this would entice ANYONE to vote for her? Because it sounds like a bunch of political doublespeak.
If you enjoyed this post, please consider to leave a comment or subscribe to the feed and get future articles delivered to your feed reader.
Comments
PP:
I think what’s she’s saying is that it’s better to prevent problems than to try and fix them.
And PP, you and I could use a “bold initiative” get us both of us off our fat butts and exercising more. Nancy’s just looking out for our health. Perhaps Gov. Mike will even make me the Physical Fitness Czar to enforce mandatory exercising. I’ll nanny-state your gut (and mine) away!
Todd Epp
SD Watch http://www.southdakotawatch.net
Political High http://politicalhigh.today.com
PP never met a Democrat he would say something good about, or a Republican (besides Stan) that he would say something bad about. When you read this blog you get what you paid for.
Ho ho ho. You got me there Anonymous.
(that was sarcasm, for the humor impaired)
Anon, I know I’ve said nice things about you once or twice. I’ve asked your opinion. I’ve even watered your plants. Don’t be so snotty this close to the election.
Anon 1:16
What, you’re Beavis or Butthead’s cousin or something? 
Beavis: “He said “morning wood.” (Actually Morning. Would…)
Butthead: “Yeah, morning wood, heh, heh.”
Todd Epp
Straight Lawyer Extraordinaire
SD Watch http://www.southdakotawatch
Political High http://politicalhigh.today.com
Sorry, PP. The temptation to be snotty is overwhelming sometimes.
Come to think of it, you may have once said there’s no evidence that I’ve beaten my wife recently.
Come on, why can’t we all play nicey-nice? Nancy says it’s “all about people, not politics”. Yea right!! Ya ever see that gal in a courtroom? She’s a cross between a menopausal crocodile and a pissed off pit-bull on heroin. She’d just as soon rip out your throat. Sure she’s all sugar coated on the outside – but she’s a stone cold liberal on the inside.
“Stop spending dollars on problems that should have been avoided in the first place.” Wonder how she feels about bailing out idiots who signed mortgage papers when they knew damn well they couldn’t make the payments.
O yes, Terbak wants to stop issues before they happen…TRANSLATION…. Fully Regulate, Fully Regulate, Fully Regulate. That means if she is against it then you can’t do it, can’t have it, BUT YOU have to PAY for it, and PAY for it, and PAY for it and of course we can not forget about the TAX us,TAX us and TAX us,
As broke as America is and how broke most states are, I only hope those tax and spenders in Pierre, might decide maybe to clean up Laws instead of trying to put more pressure on the taxpayers. WE DON’T have it.
Anon 5:45 or bailing out banks that falsified mortgage papers and bundled all the junk together into derivatives, selling the resulting securities while taking a nice commission each time they churned the account.
Republicans don’t want to talk about that Nick. They are the “see no evil” monkey when it comes to other republicans and big business. They turn a blind eye to Haliburton’s $100 million + fraudulent overbilling in Iraq, but those people on food stamps are ruining the country because they need a couple hundred dollars for food. They turn a blind eye – like 5:45 there – to McCain’s plan to buy bad mortgages from irresponsible banks (letting them off the hook) and giving borrowers – only the irresponsible ones – a discount all with taxpayer money.
All you gotta remember Nick: Republicans good/Democrats bad
Nancy’s only a few pounds away from looking like a gunny sack full of kittens when’s she’s walking away from you herself. She shouldn’t throw stones.
I guess except in her case it’s not burlap, it’s probably baby alpaca wool or maybe a soy-based fabric.
I wonder if these weight-related (gunny sack full of kittens-really?) or personality (elf’s comments @ 5:10) comments would be made if Nancy was a male. Maybe I’m the only one to find them horribly offensive.
Nick: There is an extensive FBI investigation going on with regard to fraud. I talked to two people who are in the accounting field in the last few days in MPLS and here in Sioux Falls. They are getting ready to hire forensic accountants to aid them. The fraud will be dealt with in the criminal (not Congressional) process.
The interesting by-product of this criminal investigation is what will they do to the borrowers who submitted fraudulent information. Providing inaccurate information to a bank with the intent to procure credit is a federal crime. There will be alot of “little” people ensnared here.
Anonymous 9:43 p.m.: RE McCain’s proposal to buy mortgages. I don’t like the plan because I am not confident it will do what McCain intends. This said his intention is honorable: Put a floor on the housing prices for all homeowners. Home Equity is not only a major source of liquidity for people but also a source of confidence (critically lacking today). However, for you to be critical of it, this is one of the major reason’s Senator Johnson didn’t vote for the bailout bill.
Finally, your sactimony is palpable. Considering the principal role in this debacle of Dodd, Frank, and their Democrat collegues on their committees, unless you are willing to chastise them, you credibility is nil as it you suscribe to the concept that Democrats good/Republicans bad.
P.S. Has a single member of Congress or the Clinton/Bush administrations “manned-up” and taken any responsibility in their complicitness in this problem? Until one does, I am o f the mind to “throw them all out.”
Anon 12:20
Read at the beginning of the comments. There’s a weight comment or two about a couple of guys, Epp and PP (he’s the guy without the E).
Fat Boy Todd
SD Watch http://www.southdakotawatch.net
You’re doing a dance on McCain’s buyout Troy. Is it good for taxpayers to buy bad debt from banks? Or isn’t it? McCain doesn’t want any upside for the taxpayers (like bank stock) He just wants to buy banks’ downside. That’s utterly and totally ridiculous. No debate about it.
Anon 3:31: Dance? What part of this did you not understand: “I don’t like the plan because I am not confident it will do what McCain intends.”
Furthermore, nobody (McCain or Obama) is interested in bailing out banks just to cover the bank’s losses. The challenge is to figure out the best way to stop the housing value slide because it will lead to a significant contraction of the economy and a loss of jobs. If this loss of jobs and more severe recession comes about, the impact on the deficit and govt. spending will be worse than the dollars “lost” on McCain’s plan. This is a fact.
This said, I will repeat “I don’t like the plan because I am not confident it will do what McCain intends.”
The outcome of the Presidential race is not in doubt at this point. In defeat, McCain will most certainly call upon his voters to support President Obama and put this divisive race behind all of us for the good of America. Let’s all keep that in mind and rally around President Obama next year as he takes office.
Don’t worry about it, she’s still going to win.
Frankly, I’m surprised PP has covered this race more. Then again, I’m also surprised that Al hasn’t turned out to be the “campaign machine” that people claimed he was going to be.