• Hi Guest, want to participate in the discussions, keep track of read/unread posts access private forums and more? Create your free account and increase the benefits of your eGriz.com experience today!

Mr. Wahlberg goes to Helena UPDATED w/post comments

BWahlberg said:
Meant to add in, Pat wanted to make it very clear he was and always has been talking about 6 student athletes. He referred to them as outlier students. He said that was what the NYT asked him about and his quotes were not mis-quoted but taken out of context.

Of course my counter to that is the lack of clarification on that until today. This is the first time I'd heard his comments were towards just 6 former student athletes. While I cannot say this on his behalf it is purely my suspicion that he was meaning to speak on these few former athletes but he wisely crafted the message to do something otherwise.
Click to expand...

He had the chance to clarify himself but chose not do do that just stand behind his comments.
 
Thanks for the recap and great work on this BW! You have gone above and beyond for the sake of the good. If I was a cave-man senator and I saw and heard all the testimony, arguments, and division about one board of regents' nominee, I would conclude that nominee was simply too controversial and would be looking for someone that can bring people together. The BOR position isn't about one person's endless knowledge and ability to orate endlessly, it is about being able work together with others and bring in fresh ideas.
 
Great job, Brint. I watched on line; thankfully I had a meeting which caused me to miss all the proponants. :) But saw all of you starting with Jim Foley. I think it was especially persuasive that friends of PW and a democrat were there to speak respectfully but forcibly in opposition.

I, too, am afraid he will be confirmed, but I think you all gave them plenty of reason to pause and consider.
 
Thank you BW. I was just about to call my buddies in Helena and get a case of beer and start dragging Canyon Ferry! My guess is the confirmation is a done deal but I will wait for your call for action tomorrow.
 
Thanks BW...just watched it all on local channel... Foley/Duffey both earned a ton of respect from this guy! Tough to do being Pat's friend... but had balls to stand up and call him out. Too bad Windbag Boy and other Democratic Senators will vote politically not ethically.
 
First off, Brint, good job. It takes some guts to stand up there and say what you did. It's easy to spout off on an internet forum, as many of us do, orders of magnitude more difficult to testify in such a public setting. You did a good job and it was particularly effective, and appropriate, to burnish your credentials as a Democrat.

This nomination is not a lock as others have stated----if it was, you wouldn't see the massive effort being made on PW's behalf. I think every staffer who ever worked for the man has been contacted to write a letter to the editor or appear at the hearing.

I am pretty close to the scene here in Helena and I can tell you that the real forum where this confirmation will be settled is on the floor of the Senate. I wouldn't be surprised to see the committee simply move the resolution on to the floor, and when it comes up on Second Reading, there will be a motion concerning PW.

I think the Demo's are pretty much locked down in favor of the confirmation---- you saw that in Windy Boy's comments--- just being a little more candid than most of the D's. But D's are in the minority (29-21) in the Senate, they would have to pick up some Repub votes to defeat the motion.

That's where things will get tight. Most R's will vote against PW, but will enough of them cross over to the other side on this vote??? Suspect it will be very close.

Contact your Senator, particularly if they happen to be a Republican. This thing is far from over, and don't be put off by the committee action (the press will likely report that the Williams nomination came out of committee in good shape)----- because the real action will happen on the floor with all Senators voting.
 
Here's the story I posted this morning...it contains the audio from Pat Williams and Jim Foley from the committee meeting, plus links to the interview I did with Pat Williams just after his 'thug' comments appeared in print.
Peter Christian
KGVO Radio

http://newstalkkgvo.com/pat-williams-appears-before-senate-education-committee-jim-foley-testifies-audio/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
 
BWahlberg said:
- One thing that I thought might've unraveled his argument was when he called the Missoulian a bunch of 3rd rate reporters. In the middle of a speech about healing and moving beyond titles/name calling that (IMO) should not have been in there. I noticed on twitter that was the one big takeaway from the liberal/leftists following - they pounced all over that.
Click to expand...

I agree attacking the press was a bad idea, but you gotta admit this is pretty damn funny from Missoulian reporter Martin Kidston:
Martin J. Kidston ‏@martinkidston 15h

Foley digs Missoulian’s “third rate reporters” after saying "enough is enough on name calling"…
Click to expand...

Martin J. Kidston ‏@martinkidston 15h

Opponents continue to express frustration over media coverage of recent UM criminal trials and how they were reporter.
Click to expand...

Martin J. Kidston ‏@martinkidston 15h

Brennen Cain asks committee members to consider 22,000 signatures in favor of Pat Williams, and 2,100 in opposition of his appointment.

Matt Singer Matt Singer ‏@mattsinger7 15h

@martinkidston http://change.org" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; petitions I see show 2,286 in favor and 1,257 opposed. what am i missing?


Martin J. Kidston Martin J. Kidston ‏@martinkidston 14h

@mattsinger7 You are correct. Comas count even in Tweets. It's 2,200, not 22,000. My bad. Thanks...
Hide conversation



4:33 PM - 20 Mar 13 · Details

Matt Singer Matt Singer ‏@mattsinger7 14h

@martinkidston i also don't see 2,100 in opposition unless some of them are stealth opponents...
Click to expand...

22,000 instead of 2200? Freudian slip, biased or shoddy reporting? Proof of 3rd rate reporting?
 
First off, Brint, good job. It takes some guts to stand up there and say what you did. It's easy to spout off on an internet forum, as many of us do, orders of magnitude more difficult to testify in such a public setting. You did a good job and it was particularly effective, and appropriate, to burnish your credentials as a Democrat.

This nomination is not a lock as others have stated----if it was, you wouldn't see the massive effort being made on PW's behalf. I think every staffer who ever worked for the man has been contacted to write a letter to the editor or appear at the hearing.

I am pretty close to the scene here in Helena and I can tell you that the real forum where this confirmation will be settled is on the floor of the Senate. I wouldn't be surprised to see the committee simply move the resolution on to the floor, and when it comes up on Second Reading, there will be a motion concerning PW.

I think the Demo's are pretty much locked down in favor of the confirmation---- you saw that in Windy Boy's comments--- just being a little more candid than most of the D's. But D's are in the minority (29-21) in the Senate, they would have to pick up some Repub votes to defeat the motion.

That's where things will get tight. Most R's will vote against PW, but will enough of them cross over to the other side on this vote??? Suspect it will be very close.

Contact your Senator, particularly if they happen to be a Republican. This thing is far from over, and don't be put off by the committee action (the press will likely report that the Williams nomination came out of committee in good shape)----- because the real action will happen on the floor with all Senators voting.
 
grizfromhel said:
First off, Brint, good job. It takes some guts to stand up there and say what you did. It's easy to spout off on an internet forum, as many of us do, orders of magnitude more difficult to testify in such a public setting. You did a good job and it was particularly effective, and appropriate, to burnish your credentials as a Democrat.

This nomination is not a lock as others have stated----if it was, you wouldn't see the massive effort being made on PW's behalf. I think every staffer who ever worked for the man has been contacted to write a letter to the editor or appear at the hearing.

I am pretty close to the scene here in Helena and I can tell you that the real forum where this confirmation will be settled is on the floor of the Senate. I wouldn't be surprised to see the committee simply move the resolution on to the floor, and when it comes up on Second Reading, there will be a motion concerning PW.

I think the Demo's are pretty much locked down in favor of the confirmation---- you saw that in Windy Boy's comments--- just being a little more candid than most of the D's. But D's are in the minority (29-21) in the Senate, they would have to pick up some Repub votes to defeat the motion.

That's where things will get tight. Most R's will vote against PW, but will enough of them cross over to the other side on this vote??? Suspect it will be very close.

Contact your Senator, particularly if they happen to be a Republican. This thing is far from over, and don't be put off by the committee action (the press will likely report that the Williams nomination came out of committee in good shape)----- because the real action will happen on the floor with all Senators voting.
Click to expand...
As posted in another thread, here's the response from my state senator:

Truth be told, all the Regents are out of control. Less than 50% of students graduate in 6 years. These people are failing but pretend the answer is more money. They are asking professors to spend as much of their time on "community involvement" - read community activism. And they are not agitating for free markets and less government. My vote against Williams will be a no vote against the whole lot of them.

Jason

So I hope it gets to the Senate floor.
 
Thank you Brint!
One thing that's been bothering me, PW says his "thug" quote was taken out of context by the NYT. Did PW ever go on record that he contacted the NYT complaining that his "thug" quote was taken out of context? No, I don't think so. This and the fact on the timing of the "thug" quote just pre-trial is too damn obvious that there is an agenda out there.

Cue JBS to ref. PW's wife in 3.....2.....1...
 
PolsonGrizFan said:
Thank you Brint!
One thing that's been bothering me, PW says his "thug" quote was taken out of context by the NYT. Did PW ever go on record that he contacted the NYT complaining that his "thug" quote was taken out of context? No, I don't think so. This and the fact on the timing of the "thug" quote just pre-trial is too damn obvious that there is an agenda out there.

Cue JBS to ref. PW's wife in 3.....2.....1...
Click to expand...

He did provide the senators a written statement from the reporter that wasn't read but he said suggests that he was taken out of context.

Of course again the issue here is disclosure, very late, to a senate panel, this should've been info he was plastering across the media the day that NYT and ESPN article came out.
 
BWahlberg said:
Meant to add in, Pat wanted to make it very clear he was and always has been talking about 6 student athletes. He referred to them as outlier students. He said that was what the NYT asked him about and his quotes were not mis-quoted but taken out of context.

Of course my counter to that is the lack of clarification on that until today. This is the first time I'd heard his comments were towards just 6 former student athletes. While I cannot say this on his behalf it is purely my suspicion that he was meaning to speak on these few former athletes but he wisely crafted the message to do something otherwise.
Click to expand...
Good job Brint. I agree with you on his recent comments of saying he was misquoted, coming too late. He initially said he stood by the comments. I assume, only after pressure from people trying to help him get on the board has he change his tune. Once he is on the board he will be the same out of touch person he was during the NYT interview.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Back
Top