Steelman knocked Hulshof OUT!!!!!!!!!!!!! He has a glass jaw and she shattered it today. He didn’t have all his Washington buddies to defend him and he went down. Anyone who thought this thing was over knows now that it’s just getting started!

I saw them both at the Republican state convention, and Hulshof beat the tar out of Steelman. She just sounded pathetic.

And by the way, although I am completely opposed to all earmarks, Hulshof is right, and Steelman is wrong, regarding this issue. Hulshof didn’t vote for the earmark, he voted for the bill which contained the earmark. When leadership puts earmarks in a bill, you can take it or leave it as a package. So he could “vote for the bridge to nowhere” or he could “vote against the transportation bill.” That’s how it works. Either Sarah doesn’t understand that, or she’s intentionally being misleading.

Jarhead and the candidates are both right: (1) The Post and others have a right to seek these records, and (2) The Post is certainly an adjunct of the Democratic party. Were (2) not true, the Post would also be seeking correspondence from Jay Nixon’s office. We know that Nixon didn’t preserve e-mails either, he’s a total hypocrite on this issue.

On the fee offices … Hulshof would put them out for bid, Nixon would probably hand them over to whoever makes a big contribution to his campaign. Then, he’ll form a committee to investigate the people who run the fee offices right now. We know that Nixon is quite willing to (mis)use the power of his office to strike at his political enemies. Kind of reminds me of another politician who shares his surname.

I heard Nixon scampered out after about 10 minutes. What’s he have to hide? What is he afraid of? Good thing it was all caught on tape!

Steelman is not afraid to let the chips fall where they may. Love that about her. She is not beholden to the failed republican leadership of this state, beginning with baby Blunt. Hulshof is an enabler of Bush’s failed leadership. Most always marched in step with Bush, Cheney, Rove, etc. Will be voting for Steelman and hope she continues to expose Hulshof for what he truly is——-all the way to the primary election.

Hey Steelman supporters: I’ll start listening to your arguments about Hulshof if you admit that your candidate has nothing to say. Just be honest and admit that your candidate is an empty suit and I’ll be there to listen.

The reason I know you candidate is a little short in the ideas department is because she has done nothing but try to beat Hulshof down, it’s not as if this is the end of a long campaign, relatively speaking this has been a very short primary battle, yet Steelman has already run out of things to talk about (I don’t think she had anything to begin with). So she tries to drag Hulshof down to her level.

He releases a policy proposal, she lashes out at him. He gets an endorsement, she lashes out at him. He gives a good speech, she lashes out at him. Why doesn’t she just talk about what she will do, or her values, or her ideas? Does she have any?

So when you are ready to be an adult and be honest with yourself, I will be here.

Dear confused: you are! you sound like someone Kenny has put up to blogging for you: all allegations, no facts. If you don’t live in Washington, you ought to - you’re a lobbyist for Hulshof. Ttruth hurts, i’m an informed missourian, no confusion here -

Informed: I hope your name is meant to be ironic. And while I am not connected to Hulshof I can tell that you are connected to Steelman; your tact says it all. Instead of trading in fact, you have chosen to name-call.

However, you want specifics and you’re in luck, I have them. First, Hulshof rolled out an ethics proposal—Steelman called him names and said that later in the campaign she would roll out her own plan. Second, Hulshof announced that he would roll out a pro-life platform. Steelman tried to beat him to the punch but fell flat when it was revealed that her “platform” was filled with stale ideas and a proposal that she herself said could not be enforced. Also due to this thrown together Steelman rollout, we found out that she was accepting stem cell money, and not reporting it (first is shady, second is illegal). Third, Hulshof rolled out a crime package a few weeks ago and Steelman attacked him again and when pressed about when her crime package would be released her spokesman said, “sometime later.”

Well I’m waiting, waiting for an idea, a single idea that will show me that she actually has a plan besides “Hulshof Bad Steelman Good.” So Informed, I repeat my plea, give me something, anything or just tell me that she is an empty suit and I will listen to what you have to say about Hulshof. I will be waiting.

Then again, I’m also waiting for Christmas.

I have to admit that I agree with confused on this point. Historically, you can’t be something with nothing. Sarah is trying to disprove that one, and I give a lot of power to her, but in the absense of actual ideas, she just wants to hit out at Hulshof. I just don’t think this is how a person who wants to be Governor should act. She’s rapidly turning into the Missouri Republican party’s own Dennis Kucinich: nothing really substantive to say, but sure makes life hell for the rest of the party.

Confused = John Hancock. Keep blogging while Steelman runs circles around you and Hulshof’s failed Bush/Blunt legacy.