We keep hearing from nearly everyone Daniel Mongiardo meets that he tells them we’re being unfair. He thinks we’re being unfair for constantly discussing the facts and reminding readers of his record, apparently.
Of course, we also spend a fair amount of time pointing out campaign mistakes, just as we’ve done with nearly every other candidate in the past.
If he can’t handle legitimate criticism and a discussion of the facts now, can you imagine how upset he’d be if he made it to the general election and had to face a Republican… with no scruples or compassion and an endless pot of money?
16 responses so far ↓
1 Thunder Storm // Jun 24, 2009 at 5:08 pm
Its simple, Why doens’t Mongiardo answer the claims people like you are publishing.
Where is his staff?
I’m almost beginning to think they are as incompetent as Richie Farmers. That might be stretching it a bit but why not answer the reports now instead of in the middle of a heated campaign.
This is “transparency times” and Mongiardo was a very early supporter of our transparent President.
2 jake // Jun 24, 2009 at 5:12 pm
Uh, they’re not “claims” …
It’s a fact that he was behind Senate Bill 245.
It’s a fact that Daniel Mongiardo pushed state legislators to sign anti-gay pledges every year.
It’s a fact that he’s bought and paid for by mountaintop removal proponents (and, no, I’m not being nasty toward the coal industry – just MTR).
These aren’t merely claims. There’s no way to refute them. They’re facts.
3 The Liberal // Jun 25, 2009 at 7:33 am
Very slippery wording of you Jake: “Of course, we also spend a fair amount of time pointing out campaign mistakes, just as we’ve done with nearly every other candidate in the past.” The most interesting part is: “nearly every other candidate”. Because of course you haven’t uttered one word critical about Jack Conway’s blunders. Please, don’t try and tell us he hasn’t made more than a few and quite public blunders at that. One might come to the conclusion that you’re in bed with his campaign.
During your April 10th, 2009, “An Interview with Jack Conway for U.S. Senate” you stated: “We didn’t throw him softballs and we didn’t let him off the hook.” I did noticed you didn’t ask the Attorney General if he supported gay marriage. You didn’t ask one question regarding gay rights. You simply asked him: “Would you legislate discrimination?” Could it be your candidate isn’t as liberal as you would like everyone to believe he is?
Jake, ask Jack Conway if he supports gay marriage or gay rights legislation! You won’t do it, because you know what his answer will be.
4 jake // Jun 25, 2009 at 8:19 am
That’s bunk. Anyone who’s read this site for more than a day or knows I’ve given Jack Conway shit. Fortunately, though, I don’t have to point out every law his campaign breaks (because it doesn’t) or that he’s a homophobe (because he’s not and wasn’t behind SB245. But thanks for your ridiculous spin.
Fact of the matter is I did ask Jack about gay marriage and other matters. Like I said at the time, not all questions would be published at that time. Again, nice try.
I know Jack isn’t a homophobe and that he’s not opposed to gay marriage. Otherwise I wouldn’t support him over Daniel Mongiardo, the architect of SB245.
I love that you’re obsessed.
5 The Liberal // Jun 25, 2009 at 12:38 pm
“Fact of the matter is I did ask Jack about gay marriage and other matters. Like I said at the time, not all questions would be published at that time… I know Jack isn’t a homophobe and that he’s not opposed to gay marriage.” Excellent, that was two and a half months ago, print the questions and Jack Conway’s answers. If you are unwilling to do that, only one conclusion can be drawn. Your candidate is not for gay marriage or gay rights and by your definition a homophobe or perhaps Jack Conway asked you to keep his position confidential.
Personally, on principle, I couldn’t support a candidate that won’t stand by their own convictions.
6 jake // Jun 25, 2009 at 12:44 pm
Uh, I already told you how Conway answered the question. And unfortunately for you, you don’t get to dictate what or when I publish anything.
You said, “Personally, on principle, I couldn’t support a candidate that won’t stand by their own convictions.”
Then why do you support Daniel Mongiardo while he openly denies standing against equality and openly complains about his direct involvement in SB 245 being reported on a regular basis? Seems to me you’re a hypocrite who is terrified to reveal your identity.
But that’s typical with folks like Kim Geveden and the few people with whom Lt. Dan surrounds himself. Attack the messenger instead of the message, obfuscate and never deal with the facts if you can help it.
7 The Liberal // Jun 25, 2009 at 1:07 pm
“And unfortunately for you, you don’t get to dictate what or when I publish anything.” Jake, I just believe that candidates should stand up and say what they believe in. Clearly, you do not. You won’t publish the full interview with Jack Conway because he doesn’t support gay rights and yourself image can’t stand that. Until you prove otherwise, it is my belief that Jack Conway is against gay rights.
“Seems to me you’re a hypocrite who is terrified to reveal your identity.”, so you can call me a homophobe because I don’t agree with your amateurish approach to gay rights. No thanks!
“But that’s typical with folks like Kim Geveden and the few people with whom Lt. Dan surrounds himself. Attack the messenger instead of the message, obfuscate and never deal with the facts if you can help it.” I know Kim Geveden and like him even less than I like you. In point of fact, I would be more likely to buy you a drink than Geveden.
“Attack the messenger instead of the message”, that’s rich, your entire last message was primarily attacking me, not my arguments.
8 jake // Jun 25, 2009 at 1:26 pm
How many times can I say this without people spinning out of control? Jack has told me on-the-record that he doesn’t not oppose civil unions and equality. Read. R-e-a-d. Stop with the obfuscation.
You won’t disclose your identity not because I stand up for equality and rightfully point out that Daniel Mongiardo is a homophobe – but because you’re afraid for people to know you let some random fruit cake homo win an argument with you.
Guess that’s why Kim is constantly trying to get me to let him buy me gin & tonics after every political event we’re ever at? Because he’s unlikely to buy me a drink? This must mean you’d buy me the big bottle of Tanq instead of just a few drinks.
Let’s look at my last comment:
I address that I’ve already told you where Conway stands. I told you that you don’t get to dictate what I do or when I do it.
I addressed– quoted, actually – what you said about convictions and support. And I asked you why you support someone who does precisely what you say you stand against. Note that you did not answer the question.
I pointed out that you were one of Dannyboy’s ‘attack the messenger, not the message’ types. And what’d you do? Tried to turn it around, suggesting that I’m attacking you personally for having the gall to question your argument or message.
Nice. Thanks for proving me right again.
9 Taylor // Jun 25, 2009 at 1:45 pm
Just to reiterate Jake’s point about Conway, enjoy this quote:
“Jake: Would you legislate discrimination? (much as Daniel Mongiardo did in 2004 with Kentucky Senate Bill 245)
Conway: No. I will not legislate discrimination. I don’t support discrimination against anyone at any time. I don’t believe in discrimination. Period.”
taken from http://pageonekentucky.com/2009/04/10/an-interview-with-jack-conway-for-us-senate/
10 schankula // Jun 25, 2009 at 2:26 pm
at least “The Liberal” agrees that Mongiardo is a homophobe.
11 johnny masters // Jun 26, 2009 at 2:45 am
Don’t vote for Mongiardo for Senator.
12 EasternKY // Jun 30, 2009 at 10:19 am
Support Conway or not, you have to admit that a question like, “Would you legislate discrimination?” is a little biased in its approach. It’s like asking someone about abortion by saying,
“Do you support killing babies?”
My hunch is that Conway would have voted for SB 245 had be been in the legislature. Why? Because he’s a politician with a vision for higher office. And if asked if he as a personal voter supported the constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage, he’d say yes…just like Steve Beshear did in 2007. In order to win a statewide office in this state too many politicians (and voters) see that as a prerequisite and the wrong answer could mean automatic disqualification in the eyes of too many voters.
13 jaded dude // Jun 30, 2009 at 11:31 am
Voting for SB 245 and CO-SPONSORING SB 245 are two different things entirely!!
Most of us are cynical enough to realize why a politician in rural Kentucky would feel they had to vote “yes”, but to actually CO-SPONSOR this hateful amendment is awful beyond belief.
14 EasternKY // Jun 30, 2009 at 2:50 pm
Yes he co-sponsored it, but when? In the midst of a contentious Senate campaign in a campaign year that gay marriage cost many Democrats, including Kerry (and Mongiardo) the election. McConnell knew what he was doing when he had this placed on the ballot the same year Bunning and Northup were facing tough re-election battles. The legislation was spurred by politics, not homophobia. And Jack Conway–or any politician in Kentucky who wants to seek higher office–would have down the same thing.
15 jake // Jun 30, 2009 at 2:55 pm
Actually, he co-sponsored it after he was on the receiving end of “limp-wristed” jokes from Jim Bunning & Crew. And he’s never denied that his ardent work to get the amendment through was a direct result of that.
And “Eastern Kentucky Dems” don’t hop around various Washington, D.C. wifi networks or illegally spoof IP addresses.
Fact of the matter? Jack Conway wasn’t a State Senator when that mess went down. And he’s told me – on the record – that he didn’t vote for and did not support the amendment. We don’t play what ifs in politics. It’s what you do with your public record that counts. Unfortunately for Daniel Mongiardo, his record is tainted with hardcore homophobic action.
P.S. If SB245 wasn’t about homophobia – why has Lt. Dan gone out of his way each and every year to pressure state legislators to sign declarations that they wouldn’t support equality?
This is a tired argument. The facts are the facts. If Daniel Mongiardo isn’t homophobic, then he’d denounce his past actions.
16 jaded dude // Jun 30, 2009 at 3:35 pm
Actually EasternKY, you’re dead wrong. In 2004 I WAS seeking higher office in Kentucky and won the Democratic nomination for 2nd District U.S. Representative in a three-way race while standing up against this hateful amendment. You can check out video of the KET primary debate from 04’ on their website and see for yourself!
Mitch McConnell isn’t a member of the General Assembly and he didn’t put this on the state ballot: Republicans and Democratic traitor Dan Mongiardo did!!
Why don’t you ask yourself why Dan Mongiardo, a registered Democrat, would push so hard for an amendment that would obviously do nothing but have a negative effect on all of us Democratic candidates that year?!
Seems to me a true Democrat in the State Senate would’ve fought their tail off to prevent such a measure from passing!
Leave a Comment