Michael Bates is an embarrassment to the Republican party

[RecycleMichael]

I think publishing a long ago divorce document was in poor taste. It is yet another reason why more good people don't run for office.

I respect Michael Bates for his research and continual fight for community issues. I  read his blog on a regular basis and he has educated me on many issues.

But around elections (especially when his friend Chris Medlock is running) he seems to blur good judgement with a want to attack political opponents. I understand this problem because it happens to me as well.

I do think the strategy has backfired and he has hurt republicans in general elections with his actions. As a democrat, I am OK with it.

[DowntownNow]

I'll have to disagree with Recycle on this one again.  If all we had to go by were the fliers and televisions spots publiched by candidates, then they would all be perfect saints, fine family leaders, well educated, etc etc...it takes some digging to get to the truth.  I don't find what Bates did to be in bad taste at all...it is usually the people like Bates that cause us to 'hmmmmm' and not rush to judgement. 

Bates merely pointed out the fact that the divorce proceedings contained statements by the candidate'e own counsel that were in contradiction to public statements made that supported his positions, experience and his very candidacy, nothing more and nothing less.  At the very least, it caused me to stop and consider all my choices, taking in the most information I could find.  If such a statement by Bates had not been backed up in the documents he referred to, I would not have given them as much, if any, weight at all. 

Looking back in it, it caused me to look at it two ways: 1) Dewey Jr. is really not the success he portrays himself to be or 2) Dewey Jr. had his lawyer take a stated position that was misleading to reconcile a more favorable divorce outcome...neither of which made me comfortable in selecting him as my candidate. 

Simply truth, if you don't like what Bates has to offer, don't read it.

[RecycleMichael]

Spoken with a hidden name...

Would you want your divorce posted on someone else's website? How about your family's business dealings (lawsuits, liens, etc.)?

Tell me what political wisdom we can glean from Michael's comments on the divorce...again these are Michael's comments, not court records.

"In this case, Husband and Wife lived together in the home for nearly fifteen years. They lived there together for five years after conveying the home to Wife's revocable trust. And, both began the divorce proceedings claiming the home was marital. Necessarily, however, transferring marital property to Wife's trust could not convert what was marital property into Husband's separate property." 

Tell me what that has to do with his running for Mayor.

or this one...

As a point of comparison, between December 1994 and December 2000, the S&P 500 nearly tripled in value, but the Bartlett family's net worth declined slightly from $4,551,825 to $4,506,100, according to the spreadsheet mentioned above.

This was not pertinent information as to the qualifications of the candidate. It was an excuse to attack the opponent as rich, but not richer from his business.

[MichaelBates]

Tell me what political wisdom we can glean from Michael's comments on the divorce...again these are Michael's comments, not court records.

"In this case, Husband and Wife lived together in the home for nearly fifteen years. They lived there together for five years after conveying the home to Wife's revocable trust. And, both began the divorce proceedings claiming the home was marital. Necessarily, however, transferring marital property to Wife's trust could not convert what was marital property into Husband's separate property." 

Michael, that quote is from the appeals court decision, and is clearly identified as such in the blog entry. It is NOT my commentary. Here is exactly what I wrote (with my words highlighted):

The court's opinion states, "In this case, Husband and Wife lived together in the home for nearly fifteen years. They lived there together for five years after conveying the home to Wife's revocable trust. And, both began the divorce proceedings claiming the home was marital. Necessarily, however, transferring marital property to Wife's trust could not convert what was marital property into Husband's separate property."

The quote is at the heart of the court's decision. Bartlett Jr argued that the house was his separate property because he paid for it from his inheritance. The Court of Civil Appeals said he lived with his wife in it for 15 years, owned it jointly, and then put it in her trust -- that makes it either marital property or her separate property, but definitely not his separate property.

[PepePeru]

I guess your party's "soldiers" went AWOL on this one.

[RecycleMichael]

The quote is at the heart of the court's decision. Bartlett Jr argued that the house was his separate property because he paid for it from his inheritance. The Court of Civil Appeals said he lived with his wife in it for 15 years, owned it jointly, and then put it in her trust -- that makes it either marital property or her separate property, but definitely not his separate property.

My bad...but I again question what nugget of knowledge we are supposed to gain about the candidate's qualifications to be Mayor from this quote. This was personal family financial information during a divorce that you felt compelled to blog about. Why?

[Conan71]

My bad...but I again question what nugget of knowledge we are supposed to gain about the candidate's qualifications to be Mayor from this quote. This was personal family financial information during a divorce that you felt compelled to blog about. Why?

I think he's explained it very clearly, why do you continue this circular argument?  This is no different than Martinson's crew using court docs to try and disparage Chris Trail.  Personal accountability is relevant when it comes to public office, it's an indicator of that person's leadership ability.

Dewey Bartlett's commercials characterize him as a successful businessman who has "created jobs" and "cut costs".

I think it's highly relevant to reveal that someone who promises to "watch every penny" doesn't seem to be able to live within their means. 

Please don't act like you've never supported a candidate who has used Jim Burdge tactics, RM.

A more relevant question for Michael Bates at this point is who are you supporting in the general election now that you've ripped up the prevailing GOP candidate?  Not that I disagree with said ripping. 

[Grizzle4D8]

Bates: THE embarrassment of the Repugnant Party?  What goes 'round, comes round.  http://www.batesline.com/archives/2006/03/our-options-for.html

Dontcha love it when the shoe's on the other foot?

Bates' only motivation for being is simply to drink his own purple kool-aid, while thinking he's smarter than everyone, when everyone remembers his defeat at the hands of his own REPUGNANT Party.

[rwarn17588]

A more relevant question for Michael Bates at this point is who are you supporting in the general election now that you've ripped up the prevailing GOP candidate?  Not that I disagree with said ripping. 

I reckon he'll do a LaFortune -- rip into said GOP candidate for months, then turn around and endorse him.

[Grizzle4D8]

I reckon he'll do a LaFortune -- rip into said GOP candidate for months, then turn around and endorse him.

Okay Paul, that's quite enough.  Go play in another sand box if you can't make points without racial and religious slurs. Good bye.

[FOTD]

Yep.  Big Bad Bill simply spat in Bates' endorsement.  Too bad the North Tulsa pastor pimps called in the chips.  They ALWAYS count their chips and call.  That's why Jew boy WILL fail, just like Savage Sue, Big Bad, and Mommy Warbucks.

A new memorialized post from a local hater....what Okies are known for best, stupidity.

Unchecked by TNF moderhaters.

[Grizzle4D8]

A new memorialized post from a local hater....what Okies are known for best, stupidity.

Yep.  Hate and Stupidity: the stuff that makes the GREAT American Democracy go 'round.  Git used to it, or leave and don't let the damn door hit ya where da sun don't shine.

[Vision 2025]

I think publishing a long ago divorce document was in poor taste. It is yet another reason why more good people don't run for office.

I respect Michael Bates for his research and continual fight for community issues. I  read his blog on a regular basis and he has educated me on many issues.

But around elections (especially when his friend Chris Medlock is running) he seems to blur good judgement with a want to attack political opponents. I understand this problem because it happens to me as well.

I do think the strategy has backfired and he has hurt republicans in general elections with his actions. As a democrat, I am OK with it.

 I'm just glad that medical records are not public, otherwise someone would be figuring out a Colonoscopy based voting guide...

[DowntownNow]

'Relevant' divorce proceedings are not the most dire information candidates running for office have ever had to contend with and likely wont be the last of it.  In every campaign, someone is more thorough than most and finds the telling details (thanks Michael Bates). 

Recycle...you seem to forget that a candidate launching into public office has to be ready for the sniping, sometimes mean spirited things that get hurled their way.  Your dear Mayor Taylor made light of it in here State of the City speech yesterday in fact.  If you don't have a tough enough hide, you should not be in public office...or running for it.  Candidate's open themsleves to greater public scrutiny than the average citizen, its a cost bourne of running and something they all have to deal with.  Its sometimes not even about you but maybe a family member.  You, yourself, are open to more public scrutiny than most given your public position...that's because you have chosen a position that demands accountablity in the eyes of the taxpayer...not just one boss.  It's unfortunate, but part of the process.

Medlock took his fair share of criticisms with his MBA degree status, Paul Tay on his run ins with police and antics on the bike, A. Burns for being...well, A. Burns.  Everyone has something.  Dewey's is more public given his past social standing and available knoweldge out there in the public domain.

[DowntownNow]

And I'm willing to guess that given Michael Bate's stand on Dewey Bartlett and Dewey's character that has been called into question by his own accounts in the past...he will still not endorse such an individual for Mayor.  Doesn't mean he will or must endsorse anyone, but he could.  There comes a point in politics that just because its the only choice for the party, doesnt mean its the right choice for the party and requires your vote. 

Unfortunately, I think the Adelson v. Bartlett Jr. fight card was already booked by the show masters.  Adelson will come out the victor in a 'smackdown' style event that not even a Vince McMahon could concieve and promote.  There is a reason certain contributors backed both campaigns and now that any Republican contenders that didnt cater to that crowd is gone, Adelson will be left standing and Dewey left in the cold.  That's how I see it, could be wrong, but it will sure be interesting to watch.  I'm waiting Dewey to accept Tom's debate challenge from last night since he never got around to accepting one from Medlock.

And to those that dont think Medlock put up a good fight...remember, he won about 1/3 of his party's votes, behind Bartlett's 1/2 with Falling taking in a distant 1/10 and the rest split.  Id call that a challenger my friends.