Non-Incumbent Candidate For Florida's 5th (The Villages)

[Guest]

For those of you who live in Florida's Fifth Congressional District...

Map link...http://www.govtrack.us/congress/findyourreps.xpd?state=FL&district=5

...here's your non-incumbent candidate for Congress in 2012. The Fifth District embraces most of The Villages except the easternmost villages with Lady Lake addresses, has a southern border of about Wesley Chapel and a western border at the gulf and including Cedar Key.

The only candidate opposing incumbent Rich Nugent is John Russell, an independent who pledges to go to Washington with no commitment to either political party. Here's Russell's website...http://www.johnrussellforcongress.com/

Russell will get my vote as the non-incumbent, but I can be even more enthusiastic with his his pledge of independence from either political party.

[Guest]

For those of you who live in Florida's Fifth Congressional District...

Map link...http://www.govtrack.us/congress/findyourreps.xpd?state=FL&district=5

...here's your non-incumbent candidate for Congress in 2012. The Fifth District embraces most of The Villages except the easternmost villages with Lady Lake addresses, has a southern border of about Wesley Chapel and a western border at the gulf and including Cedar Key.

The only candidate opposing incumbent Rich Nugent is John Russell, an independent who pledges to go to Washington with no commitment to either political party. Here's Russell's website...http://www.johnrussellforcongress.com/

Russell will get my vote as the non-incumbent, but I can be even more enthusiastic with his his pledge of independence from either political party.

VERY interesting candidate !! FOR SURE worthy of serious consideration.

[Guest]

Kahuna........it's interesting that while you pump up your "independent" choice, you by accident or design, fail to cite the notable and significant attributes of the incumbent, Congressman Rich Nugent. Does the fact that he is a member of the Tea Party Caucus offend you?

Are you upset that Congressman Nugent is pro-veteran and military? He has three sons currently serving this country.

Perhaps his on the record opposition to Obamacare and his commitment to its repeal is a problem for you.

Could it be that you disagree with Congressman Nugent's fight to curb government spending and reign in the national debt?

Is it a bad thing that Congressman Nugent advocates for a balanced budget amendment?

I am reasonably sure you are not offended by the fact that while at Bagram Air Base in Afghanistan, the Congressman knelt and prayed with the family of a Marine who was killed in action or his support of an intelligent plan to bring the troops home from Afghanistan. Of course you will have to do some research on the specifics that I found impressive. You may or may not agree.

I took the time to do some cursory research on your man John Russell. I have to say, I was singularly unimpressed, but, that is just my opinion. Congressman Nugent, on the other hand has a definable track record that many in the district agree with.

The "vote them all out" mentality may feel good, but, votes cast with that in mind are ultimately........ frivolously wasted. A more productive attitude would for voters to educate themselves and pull the lever based on a more informed perspective. That would allow us to vote intelligently for candidates that reflect our own beliefs, needs and interests as well as the country's.

For balance to your one-way street.... Chicago style..... here is a Wikipedia link to Congressman Rich Nugent for those that need to hear the other side for balance. For certain, there may be a few positions we both disagree with, but, I doubt there is any candidate we would agree 100% with.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rich_Nugent

[Guest]

Thank you Cabo. I really appreciated your post and your well researched comments. I applaud the work of Congressman Nugent so far, and he will continue to have my support into the next election.

[Guest]

Cabo and Richie,

I have met and had the opportunity to discuss issues with Rich Nugent, probably to a greater extent than most of his constituents. And as a matter of fact, I like what Rich Nugent says his values are. I'm not the least bit put off by his membership in the Tea Party. I've said that I agree with much of what the Tea party stands for, if not their approach towards achieving their objectives. I've said that here in this forum.

As a family man, Rich Nugent has done an exemplary job. He has sons that any father would burst his buttons being proud of. That doesn't happen by chance.

My only problem with Rich Nugent is that he is totally under the control of the House GOP leadership (and whomever controls them). Regardless of what Congressman Nugent says, he can only vote as he is directed by his ideologically-driven leaders. If he wanted to reach a political compromise with the Democrats for the good of the country, he couldn't do it without incurring the wrath of the House GOP leadership and maybe the leadership of the Tea Party Caucus. And also maybe Grover Norquist.

You might argue that yes he can vote his own mind. But the fact is that he hasn't! So I see no alternative but to vote to replace our Congressman, however much I might like him personally and agree with his position on important issues.

Your response to my telling people of the candidacy of John Russell is exactly why things are unlikely to change in the Congress. By the way, is there anything that I said in my post above that "pumps up" Mr. Russell? I don't think so. If Russell has one single attribute that appeals to me, it's his pledge of independence from any political party. He has pledged to govern for the good of the country, not the good of either political party.

Too many people will say that they think that Congress is doing a terrible, irresponsible job for the people...but go on to say that their Congressman or Senator is actually OK. If that's the way you vote, not much is likely to change in Washington. We'll have the same Congress and the same party leaders until they either retire or die...and the same dysfunctional government that we've seen for a decade now. I only suggest that people who read these posts think about that.

[Guest]

Kahuna....Your harsh criticism of Congressman Nugent appears to be very contradictory according to your own words. You say he couldn't vote his own mind because he would need to comply with "ideologically" driven leaders. Yet, the GOP leadership trichotomy you define in your post often holds conflicting views. That in itself suggests a caucus that encourages independent thinking and decision making.

What specific legislation has he "not voted his own mind on"? For your convenience, I have listed below a link that will take you to at least 29 pieces of legislation he acted on early in his term. I'm finding more without much effort that would bely your criticism.

"Congressman Nugent, in just two months as a member of Congress has co-sponsored 29 pieces of legislation". Wikipedia. He certainly had no trouble going "on the record" with his positions. They're listed in the link I provided if you want to nitpick.

For you to single out the Congressman and rant "he can only vote as he is directed by his ideologically-driven leaders." without mentioning Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid, they're Democrats if I recall, is a case of selective partisan criticism. I'm sure you will gratuitously offer up a Democrat you've criticized as a token of your non-partisanship.

You also failed to mention that Russell has run before as a Democrat, rather unsuccessfully. Maybe its just me, but it is suspicious that this long time Democrat suddenly saw the light and is now running as an Independent in a very Conservative Republican District.

Always a pleasure to cross sabers with a thoughtful provocateur. Have a good evening.

[Guest]

...For you to single out the Congressman and rant "he can only vote as he is directed by his ideologically-driven leaders." without mentioning Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid, they're Democrats if I recall, is a case of selective partisan criticism. I'm sure you will gratuitously offer up a Democrat you've criticized as a token of your non-partisanship....I'm not singling out Rich Nugent at all. I AM singling out all 535 members of Congress. They have been as dysfunctional a government as this country has had, maybe in it's history.

Unfortunately I only get to vote to elect 3 of the 535. Collectively, they have been a failure. As the result, my three votes will go to candidates not currently serving in office.

If one wants to understand the effects of the system of voting for a party or continuing to return individual members to the House or Senate term after term, one need look no further than Barney Frank. He may be the most hated Congressman in a key position than any other member of the House. Clearly, he has responsibility for much of what happened and is happening in the mortgage crisis. And he is unapologetic for whatever he has done.

Now he is retiring as the result of re-districting in Massachusetts. So the seniority system in the House has already identified his replacement. Her role will be a minority leader of the House Banking Committee. If the Democrats regain control, she'll be the Chairman, the powerful position that Frank held for so many years.

Who is this political leader who will assume such an important position? Unbelievably it will be Maxine Waters, who is serving her tenth term in Congress. If we thought that Frank created legislation which was primarily ideologically-driven, Waters is so far left of Frank as to be almost out of sight.

If there was ever an example of the need for turnover in the Congress, either by changes in term limits or simply voting out incumbents, this is it! I intend to do my part. Until proven differently, I will not be voting for any incumbent for any federal office.

[Guest]

Cabo - is it really "harsh criticism"? Could it simply be the truth that sounds unpleasant? I mean, if there's a record of him voting AGAINST the people VK mentioned, then let's hear it. Producing a list of 29 co-sponsored bills isn't much when you consider how it's done. (Someone comes up with the bill and then goes around Congress lobbying for people to list co-sign the bill)

The fact that someone is a good family man, and by all account it seems he is, does not automatically qualify them for public office.

And as for "singling" this guy out - I think VK made it quite clear that he was talking about someone he could votee for. He has no vote to fight any incumbent Pelosi acolyte.

[Guest]

djp..... you seemed to have missed the point. Congressman Nugent took clear positions on 29 bills that he co-sponsored and I was quite specific in his documented positions on Obamacare, government spending, the national debt and a balanced budget amendment among many others. You may not categorically agree with his positions but he has not been a "Present" legislator in the image of Senator Obama. He has taken positions. To turn your question around, where did he bend to the party line and how do you know he subordinated himself?

Your preaching to the choir about passing bills. In my former life, I have been deeply involved in the drafting and passing of legislation. I understand the system.

Of course, being suspicious by nature, I wonder why Congressman Nugent was singled out by name. Why does a singularly unimpressive Democrat in Independent clothing, John Russell get a plug. Does the Democrat Senator Bill Nelson get a pass by not being named in the post as an incumbent who needs to get the boot? Why?

I gather from your defense that you approve of throwing all the bums out regardless of their individual records. Let's see, if that fairly tale came true.....hmmmm.....there would be........ a Democratic Congress. My, my....how convenient that would be. If I was a Democrat looking to take over the Congress, that might be a good idea. I respect you and Kahuna. My point simply is why a Republican Congressman was singled out by name and a Democratic Senator gets no name recognition as a target for the "voting the bums out" crowd. Wait a minute......the Senate is controlled by Democrats, Bill Nelson is a Democrat. If we could just throw the bums in the House out and leave the bums in the Senate.....we could......fill in the blanks. Fundamental fairness? Machiavellian maneuver?

I know, I know....sometimes my posts are not only out of the box, but off the wall....but I do have fun.

Enjoyed the exchange......have a good day.

[Guest]

I usually find your posts brilliant, but this one is exceptional in my opinion.

Why isn't VK campaigning to throw the incumbent Sen. Nelson out of office. It's the logical move for the solid steadfast "anti-incumbent" guy that he says he is; and in step with his remarks proclaiming his interest in legislators who's election he can actually vote in.

[Guest]

...I wonder why Congressman Nugent was singled out by name. Why does a singularly unimpressive Democrat in Independent clothing, John Russell get a plug. Does the Democrat Senator Bill Nelson get a pass by not being named in the post as an incumbent who needs to get the boot? Why?...Geez, as you said yourself Cabo, you really are a suspicious type. There are three simple answers to your questions...
I mentioned Rich Nugent because he is my Congressman and the representative of most people who live in The Villages. He's the only incumbent member of the House who will be on the ballot that most Villagers will vote on.

I didn't give Russell a "plug". I pointed out that he was running for the seat as the representative of the 5th District. He's the only non-incumbent candidate running. If that's a "plug", so be it.

How many times have I said that I won't vote for an incumbent? Last time I looked, Bill Nelson is in that category. Should I find ways to beat him up even though I don't intend to vote for him? That's what too many people are doing to President Obama, even though they don't intend to vote for him either. Seems like a giant waste of time to me. I didn't mention which of those running against Nelson that appeal to me because there are sixteen of them!
You need to stop looking under rocks for hidden agendas, Cabo...you too, Richie. If I have an agenda, I won't hide it.

[Guest]

...Your harsh criticism of Congressman Nugent appears to be very contradictory according to your own words...As long as we're talking about my words, Cabo, don't put any in my mouth. I said that I liked Rich Nugent personally and that I endorsed almost everything he says he stands for. However I did say that he was a member of the most dysfunctional House of Representatives that this country has ever had and for that reason alone, I will not vote for his re-election. I have recommended to all who might listen that they consider not voting for any incumbents members of Congress for the same reason.

If that's what you call "harsh criticism", wait'll I really get my dander up on a political issue or candidate. You won't have to be suspicious or look under rocks to figure out where I stand.

[Guest]

Kahuna........it's interesting that while you pump up your "independent" choice, you by accident or design, fail to cite the notable and significant attributes of the incumbent, Congressman Rich Nugent. Does the fact that he is a member of the Tea Party Caucus offend you?

Are you upset that Congressman Nugent is pro-veteran and military? He has three sons currently serving this country.

Perhaps his on the record opposition to Obamacare and his commitment to its repeal is a problem for you.

Could it be that you disagree with Congressman Nugent's fight to curb government spending and reign in the national debt?

Is it a bad thing that Congressman Nugent advocates for a balanced budget amendment?

I am reasonably sure you are not offended by the fact that while at Bagram Air Base in Afghanistan, the Congressman knelt and prayed with the family of a Marine who was killed in action or his support of an intelligent plan to bring the troops home from Afghanistan. Of course you will have to do some research on the specifics that I found impressive. You may or may not agree.

I took the time to do some cursory research on your man John Russell. I have to say, I was singularly unimpressed, but, that is just my opinion. Congressman Nugent, on the other hand has a definable track record that many in the district agree with.

The "vote them all out" mentality may feel good, but, votes cast with that in mind are ultimately........ frivolously wasted. A more productive attitude would for voters to educate themselves and pull the lever based on a more informed perspective. That would allow us to vote intelligently for candidates that reflect our own beliefs, needs and interests as well as the country's.

For balance to your one-way street.... Chicago style..... here is a Wikipedia link to Congressman Rich Nugent for those that need to hear the other side for balance. For certain, there may be a few positions we both disagree with, but, I doubt there is any candidate we would agree 100% with.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rich_Nugent

Kahuna....Your harsh criticism of Congressman Nugent appears to be very contradictory according to your own words. You say he couldn't vote his own mind because he would need to comply with "ideologically" driven leaders. Yet, the GOP leadership trichotomy you define in your post often holds conflicting views. That in itself suggests a caucus that encourages independent thinking and decision making.

What specific legislation has he "not voted his own mind on"? For your convenience, I have listed below a link that will take you to at least 29 pieces of legislation he acted on early in his term. I'm finding more without much effort that would bely your criticism.

"Congressman Nugent, in just two months as a member of Congress has co-sponsored 29 pieces of legislation". Wikipedia. He certainly had no trouble going "on the record" with his positions. They're listed in the link I provided if you want to nitpick.

For you to single out the Congressman and rant "he can only vote as he is directed by his ideologically-driven leaders." without mentioning Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid, they're Democrats if I recall, is a case of selective partisan criticism. I'm sure you will gratuitously offer up a Democrat you've criticized as a token of your non-partisanship.

You also failed to mention that Russell has run before as a Democrat, rather unsuccessfully. Maybe its just me, but it is suspicious that this long time Democrat suddenly saw the light and is now running as an Independent in a very Conservative Republican District.

Always a pleasure to cross sabers with a thoughtful provocateur. Have a good evening.

djp..... you seemed to have missed the point. Congressman Nugent took clear positions on 29 bills that he co-sponsored and I was quite specific in his documented positions on Obamacare, government spending, the national debt and a balanced budget amendment among many others. You may not categorically agree with his positions but he has not been a "Present" legislator in the image of Senator Obama. He has taken positions. To turn your question around, where did he bend to the party line and how do you know he subordinated himself?

Your preaching to the choir about passing bills. In my former life, I have been deeply involved in the drafting and passing of legislation. I understand the system.

Of course, being suspicious by nature, I wonder why Congressman Nugent was singled out by name. Why does a singularly unimpressive Democrat in Independent clothing, John Russell get a plug. Does the Democrat Senator Bill Nelson get a pass by not being named in the post as an incumbent who needs to get the boot? Why?

I gather from your defense that you approve of throwing all the bums out regardless of their individual records. Let's see, if that fairly tale came true.....hmmmm.....there would be........ a Democratic Congress. My, my....how convenient that would be. If I was a Democrat looking to take over the Congress, that might be a good idea. I respect you and Kahuna. My point simply is why a Republican Congressman was singled out by name and a Democratic Senator gets no name recognition as a target for the "voting the bums out" crowd. Wait a minute......the Senate is controlled by Democrats, Bill Nelson is a Democrat. If we could just throw the bums in the House out and leave the bums in the Senate.....we could......fill in the blanks. Fundamental fairness? Machiavellian maneuver?

I know, I know....sometimes my posts are not only out of the box, but off the wall....but I do have fun.

Enjoyed the exchange......have a good day.

I will stand by my position as stated above. I used entire quotes to avoid the in kind parsing and the redundancy your posts solicit. Sadly, from my perspective, your responses to the overall context of my posts were diminished to taking contrived swipes at statements you cleverly lifted out of context. Let the reader be the judge. It was refreshing to see you mention Sen. Nelson the Democrat by name. Just to be clear.......is Senator Marco Rubio the other unnamed Republican incumbent you would like to throw out of office?

You don't have a monopoly on dander. Have a great weekend.

[Guest]

...Just to be clear.......is Senator Marco Rubio the other unnamed Republican incumbent you would like to throw out of office?....Senator Rubio is not standing for re-election, as you know. But he too has been a member of a dysfunctional legislative body. From what I've seen and heard, there's a lot to like about both his position on issues and his character. But he has demonstrated no leadership or willingness to speak out independently from his party's leaders in the Senate. He follows the hard party line even at the expense and peril of the electorate and the country.

Unless Senator Rubio begins to demonstrate some independence and responsibility and an ability to contribute some leadership and have some influence in the Senate by 2016, and if the Senate remains an ideologically stalemated body, it's not likely that he'll get my vote for re-election. I will not choose to support "business as usual" in the U.S. Congress.

To give you some examples of Republican Senators who demonstrate the independence I speak of, consider either Senator Richard Shelby of Alabama, Senator Tom Coburn of Oklahoma or Senator Mark Kirk of Illinois.

As far as freshman Senators like Rubio go, I much prefer the independence and leadership shown by Senator Mark Kirk of Illinois. Kirk happens to be my former Congressman from Illinois' 10th District. He has shown a willingness to be creative and speak out with ideas on issues that aren't necessarily those that are set as the talking points by the Senate GOP leaders. He has a rating of 63 by the American Conservative Union, not farthest to the right, but someone who in time will likely get something done for the good of the country in the Senate.

By the way, in case someone tries to categorize either Shelby or Coburn as RINO's, they were both listed as a true conservatives by the American Conservative Union based on their votes in the Senate. They're in the company of Senators like Jim DeMint, Lindsay Graham, John Kyl and John McCain in that regard. Senator Rubio's Heritage Foundation conservative voting score is 94%, compared to 93% for Coburn and 72% for Shelby.