Good article on the true side of O'Malley

[cprenegade]

Nice article from Marta Mossburg on Martin O'Malley's petulant side. When it looks like O'Malley might not get his way, he resorts to trying to change the rules so that he can. Real piece of work this guy is, not to mention a spoiled brat who has always gotten his way.

The champagne had not stopped flowing from celebrating big wins for gay marriage and the Dream Act (the in-state tuition bill) before Governor O'Malley told WBAL that it is "a little too easy" to petition a law to referendum. (Both laws had been passed in the General Assembly and were pushed to the ballot via the referendum process by opponents.) "We've been best served in our state over the 200 or more years of our history by a representative democracy, rather than plebiscites," he said.

The O'Malley administration supports State Center, a $1.5 billion taxpayer-financed project in Baltimore City whose developers happen to have hired some allies of the governor. A group of plaintiffs sued to stop the project, claiming the process for selecting the developers violated competitive bidding laws. The O'Malley administration tried to dismiss the case, failed, then countersued plaintiffs for $100 million and lost. Plaintiffs are still waiting for the state to turn over documents in the case as ordered by court. In the meantime, the O'Malley administration tried to push through legislation in the General Assembly that would have rewritten the law for the project retroactively and circumvented existing rulings.

How many more examples are necessary to show that Mr. O'Malley's inclusive, tolerant veneer chips easily and reveals a man who, whether through temperament or proximity to power, sees the law as something to use or disregard for his own good?

http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/opi...2173154.column

[demopublican]

She really took it easy on him.

[octoburn]

Marta is probably just rehearsing for her appearance at the Maryland Conservative Action Network Conference this month in Annapolis where they'll take their messages to the people by charging people $100. door admission to listen her and others bloviate about all that they perceive is wrong.

[DaggerJohn]

Marta is probably just rehearsing for her appearance at the Maryland Conservative Action Network Conference this month in Annapolis where they'll take their messages to the people by charging people $100. door admission to listen her and others bloviate about all that they perceive is wrong.

You seem to be familiar with "bloviation".

[AtticusII]

Maybe Marta should have spent more time researching – and writing about – the third example (State Center), which was the only one that seemed to have any substance.

The first two examples are just fluff.

So, Marty and Marta disagree about the Maryland referendum process– he thinks it is too easy, she thinks it is too hard. How does that make him vindictive/thuggish?

The second example is bizarre. She quotes him using a fairly well-known figure of speech and then writes “Enough said.”

What?!?!?!?

Did she think the Governor was threatening the casino owner?!? She needed to say a lot more or nothing at all.

If those are the best three examples from the past year, I don’t think she came close to proving her point.

[octoburn]

You seem to be familiar with "bloviation".

I am. I've read your posts in the past and listened to both WCBM and WBAL radio from time to time.

[Virginia Poe]

DELETE ME FROM THIS THEAD AND THIS PATHETIC SKUMSPOT SPACE.

IF You don't even have the common courtesy to attempt to explain why NON ABUSIVE threads are deleted (so far 3 today) then this board is not worth the muscle movement of my fingers to type.

It's not like this has come as a surprise to me.

JUST BAN ME ALREADY. and THANKS FOR THE FAVOUR.
This is basically just for lefty skum spotters, to use as a place to back slap and agree with your far socialist policies.

Bann me please

[Norman]

Marta is probably just rehearsing for her appearance at the Maryland Conservative Action Network Conference this month in Annapolis where they'll take their messages to the people by charging people $100. door admission to listen her and others bloviate about all that they perceive is wrong.

Wasn't there also some pay round-table discussion against the instate tuition bill? Wonder how that worked out....

[octoburn]

Wasn't there also some pay round-table discussion against the instate tuition bill? Wonder how that worked out....

I can't speak for the round~table thingy, but the instate tuition bill worked out EXACTLY the way WE THE PEOPLE wanted it to work out as demonstrated by the voting results.

In a democratic republic, sometimes you win and sometimes you lose. And in other cases where the Fester machine gets behind something like those online petitions, one always loses.

[cprenegade]

Maybe Marta should have spent more time researching – and writing about – the third example (State Center), which was the only one that seemed to have any substance.

The first two examples are just fluff.

So, Marty and Marta disagree about the Maryland referendum process– he thinks it is too easy, she thinks it is too hard. How does that make him vindictive/thuggish?

The second example is bizarre. She quotes him using a fairly well-known figure of speech and then writes “Enough said.”

What?!?!?!?

Did she think the Governor was threatening the casino owner?!? She needed to say a lot more or nothing at all.

If those are the best three examples from the past year, I don’t think she came close to proving her point.

The example was given to support the broader point that when O'Malley is in danger of losing on an issue, he seeks to change the rules to be more in his favor.

[AtticusII]

You think that was the point of the article?!?

Given that the title of it was "O'Malley's Thuggish Side", I would have thought the point was to show that he was a thug.

And, in fact, the third example seems to be the only one where she wrote about changing the rules.

But, look, Marta is a really weak columnist so I can understand the confusion all around.

[bmore_ken]

DELETE ME FROM THIS THEAD AND THIS PATHETIC SKUMSPOT SPACE.

IF You don't even have the common courtesy to attempt to explain why NON ABUSIVE threads are deleted (so far 3 today) then this board is not worth the muscle movement of my fingers to type.

It's not like this has come as a surprise to me.

JUST BAN ME ALREADY. and THANKS FOR THE FAVOUR.
This is basically just for lefty skum spotters, to use as a place to back slap and agree with your far socialist policies.

Bann me please

Seek some mental help already. Geez

[Marshan Man]

delete me from this thead and this pathetic skumspot space.

If you don't even have the common courtesy to attempt to explain why non abusive threads are deleted (so far 3 today) then this board is not worth the muscle movement of my fingers to type.

It's not like this has come as a surprise to me.

Just ban me already. And thanks for the favour.
This is basically just for lefty skum spotters, to use as a place to back slap and agree with your far socialist policies.

Bann me please

lol...

[octoburn]

Seek some mental help already. Geez

I might recommend some sort of spell checker too.

[cprenegade]

You think that was the point of the article?!?

Given that the title of it was "O'Malley's Thuggish Side", I would have thought the point was to show that he was a thug.

And, in fact, the third example seems to be the only one where she wrote about changing the rules.

But, look, Marta is a really weak columnist so I can understand the confusion all around.

Given that O'Malley has talked about introducing legislation that changes the criteria for bringing an issue to referendum, I would say the first example does as well.

[Norman]

DELETE ME FROM THIS THEAD AND THIS PATHETIC SKUMSPOT SPACE.

IF You don't even have the common courtesy to attempt to explain why NON ABUSIVE threads are deleted (so far 3 today) then this board is not worth the muscle movement of my fingers to type.

It's not like this has come as a surprise to me.

JUST BAN ME ALREADY. and THANKS FOR THE FAVOUR.
This is basically just for lefty skum spotters, to use as a place to back slap and agree with your far socialist policies.

Bann me please

Try sending a PM to admin, they can delete you per your request.

[octoburn]

Try sending a PM to admin, they can delete you per your request.

Isn't that just another way of someone pleading ~ "PLEASE STOP ME BEFORE I POST AGAIN!"?

[baltimoreron]

The example was given to support the broader point that when O'Malley is in danger of losing on an issue, he seeks to change the rules to be more in his favor.

The same can be said about the MD Democratic party in general. It's good to be the monopoly party!

[Saticon3]

Maybe Marta should have spent more time researching – and writing about – the third example (State Center), which was the only one that seemed to have any substance.

The first two examples are just fluff.

So, Marty and Marta disagree about the Maryland referendum process– he thinks it is too easy, she thinks it is too hard. How does that make him vindictive/thuggish?

The second example is bizarre. She quotes him using a fairly well-known figure of speech and then writes “Enough said.”

What?!?!?!?

Did she think the Governor was threatening the casino owner?!? She needed to say a lot more or nothing at all.

If those are the best three examples from the past year, I don’t think she came close to proving her point.

I only see 2, guess I'm missing one, but I think the referendum one has substance as well. It seems pretty arrogant to me to want to restrict voters ability to challenge the legislature and Gov. Seems like winning wasn't good enough , he also wants to preclude any future challenges. On-line has only been used so far for this past election, and they claim enough signatures were gathered the old fashioned way to boot. If he really has an issue with the ease that the computer age brings about, why not propose requiring in-person signatures and prohibit the on-line part, instead of the more far reaching changes he proposes to make it almost impossible to petition to referendum? Most bills already are excluded as most involve appropariations in some fashion and thus are off limits to referendum.