Print this story |
E-mail story |
This story has 15 comments Add your own |
iPod friendly | Bookmark this
What is this?
Bright makes stop at Buy Rite
Published Monday, June 29, 2009
Around 50 people were on hand at the Banks Buy Rite for a meet-and-greet with District 2 Congressman Bobby Bright, the latest in Bright’s “Congress on your Corner” series of town visits.
Bright said he felt these types of visits were important to the Democratic process.
“This is what I think our forefathers meant for us to be and for us to do is to go out and meet the people,” Bright said. “This is a two-year congressional position and the timeframe was built to make sure that we stay humble and stay responsive to the people.”
Bright said the personal connection with the people is something that has been lost in politics.
“For too long, we’ve not complied with that,” Bright said. “We have not honored that intent of our forefathers. As the congressman of District 2, I hope to reverse that and start pouring out and meeting with the good people like we did here in Banks.”
Bright was also surprised by the outcome for the event.
“I drove up, and I was very pleasantly surprised to see so many folks standing out here in the heat waiting for their congressman,” Bright said.
Among those in attendance was a group of women from a local Republican club.
“That means a great deal,” Bright said. “I think that means people are finally realizing that what I say is what I mean.”
Bright said the encouragement from members of the opposing party was a sign he was doing his job correctly.
“Had I not been a true representative of District 2, they would not have been here today,” Bright said. “But they were here. Not only were they here, but also they were encouraging me to continue doing what I’ve been doing, and that is voting the views of the vast majority of the people in District 2.”
Bright said he held these events so he could openly communicate with the people of District 2 and that they all seem to want similar things.
“They want the federal government to quit spending all this money that they see us spending, and they tell me that in no uncertain term,” Bright said.
“They want us to support our troops, and they want us to look at healthcare. Social security is also an issue.
“But, first and foremost, they want us to stabilize the economy and to do that by helping to stop wasteful spending.”
WOULD YOU LIKE TO SHARE THIS STORY?
Comments
Posted by bamaslick (anonymous) on June 30, 2009 at 10:35 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Support the troops! What else can we do to support the troops? Sometimes the people get so swept up into political jargon that they themselves start be obsessed with it. Believe me when I say, there is no troop that doesn't feel like he is not liked enough by the people of his country. I can speak on this subject because I am a soldier.
Why just look at healthcare? Help support the troops, so when they end their obligation to serve that they have universal healthcare for whatever ailment that may or may not have happened while serving will be handled the upmost healthcare.
Social Security has been an issue. I didn't hear all the outcry for Social Security when President Bush told the American public that Social Security will not be there for people in my age range (25-35) when we were eligible to receive it. I was told to do 401k or invest in an IRA...Now its an issue for some(Mad Republicans)!
We do not have to stop spending but where the funds are being allocated to and for needs to be regulated. I guess that is why we vote to have our representative forsee our best interests. Some of you may say that you didn't vote for the current president...all I can say for all of you who love a true democracy is this...America is and will always be a two party system which is not a true democracy and if you cannot fit most of your ideas into one of the parties, then move to England.
Posted by MessengerReader23 (anonymous) on June 30, 2009 at 4:09 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Great post, especially about supporting the troops and on doing more than just paying lip service to health care. Bright has voted against S-Chip health insurance for kids and against the stimulus and against climate change policies and against equal pay for women. What does this guy like? Did he think we voted for him to just go vote "no" on everything? He is going to have a run for his money when Martha Roby gets her name out there.
Posted by uglydog65 (anonymous) on June 30, 2009 at 8:01 p.m. (Suggest removal)
S-Chip health insurance for kids (new taxes), stimulus (new taxes), climate change (cost per family $1000. to $4000 per family), equal pay should be determined by market not government.
"routinely opposed tax increases, fighting hard in 2008 alone to vote against five proposed tax increases and offered solutions to to reduce government spending----- work has resulted in a local sales tax holiday". This did not come from Mr. Bright, see Martha Roby for Congress.
I did not vote for Mr. Bright but he seems to realize that you don't put out a fire by pouring gas on it.
Posted by OldSchoolPike3Worker (anonymous) on June 30, 2009 at 9:45 p.m. (Suggest removal)
If Bright really meant what he said in this article, he would be a Republican. His party stands for the opposite of those statements. So, he is either happy being one of the few Democrats that is against what his party stands for, or he is riding the political fence and trying to be all things to all people. I will never be convinced that a Democrat that votes against his party all of the time is a better representative for this conservative district than a Republican. When is someone going to ask Bright why he is even a Democrat? The Dems have been spending us into oblivion since FDR! Bright's party will not be the party that cuts spending. It never has been. Does anyone else see the hypocrisy here? At least Obama is consistent with the Democrats. I'm sorry but I just can't get on the bus with this. Don't be one thing and say your another. And one more thing, some of you Democrats that call yourself conservative don't have a clue. You may very well be conservative but if you are, you can't be a Democrat. The Democratic party is not the same party that your parents belonged to. Any Democrat that believes as Bright says he believes in the above article needs to face the fact that as long as you are a Democrat with those views, you are irrelevant. Bright and any other so-called "conservative Democrat" need to become a Republican if they want what they think to matter.
Posted by inaword (anonymous) on July 1, 2009 at 2:49 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Oldschool: Something he said has a ring of truth to it... he is voting the way the people who elected him want him to vote, Dem, Rep, Ind.
Posted by uglydog65 (anonymous) on July 1, 2009 at 4:41 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Mr. Bright seems to be an old time Democrat, He did not leave the Democratic Party, the Party left him and us.
I try not to vote based on being a Democrat, Republican, Libertarian or Independent. I try to vote for the one's that support and defend the original Constitution and Bill of Rights.
Posted by bamaslick (anonymous) on July 1, 2009 at 8:01 a.m. (Suggest removal)
I agree that you do not put out a fire by pouring gas on it...but you can fight fire with fire. Some California residents(god bless their souls) fight wildfires that come real close to their residency by setting their own fire to combat it. I say that to say this; spending is necessary at this current time, but after this so called "recession" has ended, I would like to see the President cut the spending.
I have seen how the stimulus package has worked and people have benefited from it. In North Carolina, since people have been out of work, social security claims has risen thru the roof. The Courts who handle the denied claims of individuals, has had a backlog of cases dating back to 2007, but was not able to hire additional personal to process paperwork to remove the cases. So in some instances, people who deserve or do not deserve any benefits, may haven't gotten their fair turn in court. This small precedings for the outcome of funds, has influences on crime, jobless rates, perception of state government and so on and so forth...Lets not be so quick to judge the spending is all that I am asking. After the market itself regulates, then lets let the market regulate the spending as a capitalistic system should do.
Posted by uglydog65 (anonymous) on July 1, 2009 at 9:24 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Why not let it regulate from the beginning? Why give billions to GM only to have it gone into bankruptcy anyway? Why should I pay for someone with an old gas guzzler to get a new economy car when I need one? Ford has not asked for a hand out. Why is universal health care to be paid for by a tax on health insurance by everyone except UAW workers. Has any other Insurance company been given a bail out besides AIG? Guest which insurance company insures the pension plan of the US Congress. Why are turtles getting tunnels under roads when the roads needs to be paved?
Posted by bamaslick (anonymous) on July 1, 2009 at 1:09 p.m. (Suggest removal)
If the market/economy is down it cannot regulate itself...Maybe it needs to be kick started. Giving money to GM helps protect american owned dealerships from being overrun by, thats right you guessed it, foreign entities. If your car is a gas guzzler that is helping destroy the environment and adding to the energy crisis, then by all means trade it in. Look at the big picture...if you are one of those people with so-called gas guzzling cars, the likelihood that you could afford a new is not that high. Given all the stipulations behind that, I am not sure too many people will benefit from it anyway. This was an idea that was already in place in Europe, but leave to us proud Americans to complain about anything to help the overall but slights our pockets any. The reasoning behind UAW workers not paying tax on health insurance for now, probably because the Auto Industry is failing. If the textile industry was failing...they would probably be exempt too.
I cannot speak on the AIG issue because I do not know. The roads I can speak on...the great state of Alabama from which I am from has always needed road improvement. There had to be times when Alabama's budget was good enough to get roads paved. I have stayed in a Rural area my entire life and the road has looked the same way the whole time. The state has to be accountable sometimes. Maybe if everyone wasn't so "dogmatically" inclined about certain issues, i.e. (Lottery); we would have more paved roads in my small peace of rural heaven!
Posted by uglydog65 (anonymous) on July 1, 2009 at 6:09 p.m. (Suggest removal)
The market/ economy could regulate itself if the government would stay out of it. If GM can not compete it should fail. I now drive a Chevrolet (33 miles highway) and a Ford truck (20 miles highway). In the 70's and 80's American auto companies produced high priced junk, with the attitude you will take it and like it. So here comes VW, Datsun, Toyota, Honda, and Mazda producing a better product. "reasoning behind UAW workers not paying tax on health insurance", I don't know any business not in trouble now. UAW are the only ones I have heard of being exempt (if health bill passes). "If the textile industry was failing" , Pike county use to have 2 textile plants, one in Troy and one in Brundidge, both long gone. Dose the US even have a textile industry anymore? I am not sure if Russell even has a plant left in Alabama. Selma has a textile plant making military uniforms, by order of government uniforms must be made in US. I have never heard Lottery and paved roads mentioned in the same sentience before, schools yes. I know someone that had enough money to go to Shorter and buy lottery tickets, but not enough to make house payments. I can not, nor will I support the lottery, especially when getting struck by lighting is 7 (?) times greater than winning.
Posted by OldSchoolPike3Worker (anonymous) on July 1, 2009 at 7:46 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Uglydog65, Ronald Reagan was also an "old time" Democrat before the party left him almost sixty years ago. Richard Shelby was too until '94. The Democratic Party has been way out there for decades. My point is this, the less Republicans that are in congress, the less chance we have of countering all of this spending. The best thing that can happen to the Democratic Party is for its current leadership to be defeated and for the party to become a minority. That is the only time that a conservative Democrat will actually matter. In the meantime, this "voting for the candidate, not the party mentality," will only get the extreme leaders of the Democratic Party what they want...unchecked control of what is supposed to be a very inefficient form of government. Ask yourself this question; Do liberals who believe the opposite what your beliefs are Uglydog vote for the candidate or strictly for their party? The answer is the latter of the two. This is why liberal Republicans lose every time they run against a Democrat. Supporting the Democratic party has the same consequences for us all regardless of your reasons for doing so.
Posted by uglydog65 (anonymous) on July 1, 2009 at 9:02 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I view the Republicans as the lesser of two evils.
Posted by bamaslick (anonymous) on July 2, 2009 at 7:33 a.m. (Suggest removal)
I making an example with the Textile industry. If it were a "major" industry in the US like the Auto Industry it would be exempt from paying taxes.
Just because you never heard of the lottery and road development doesn't mean that it cannot be. The percentage of the money could be for roads along with schools. Alabama could be a leader instead of a follower.
You do not want the Auto Industry to be taken over by a foreign industry. Lets try and keep it American. By not supporting the textile industry is the very reason it is gone. My mom worked at Fruit of the Loom and Russell her whole life until closed...but she had to move on when they moved on...Somewhere foreign I bet, Mexico maybe?!
The amount of people complaints are (7) times greater than the amount of people's ideas of seeking resolutions to their problems.
Posted by Blue_Sky (anonymous) on July 2, 2009 at 1:01 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Not a dimes worth of difference between the Pus or the Dems.
Posted by uglydog65 (anonymous) on July 2, 2009 at 9:28 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I look for Made in USA with what ever I purchase. Needing an electric razor several years ago, I looked at several brands, all being made over seas, then I saw a Remington. Remington nice American name, when I got it home Made in China. As I have said I drive a Ford and Chevrolet and when I am forced to replace them, my first look will be at a Ford (did not ask for bail out) or some auto made in Alabama. I believe the American auto worker could beat any foreign competition except for the UAW limiting their ability and making demands. The horse has been ridden to death. This country has the ability to take a good idea and ruin it by overdoing it. I remember when purchasing an auto you were asked what is your offer and not what do you want to pay each month. You don't actually own an auto any more, the auto runs out about the time your payments run out.
Some people complain about not having a lottery. I say work hard, save your money and not waste it on lottery tickets, where there is 1 in a million of winning. The money that comes from the lottery is the money from those that loose and the winner gives up about half for taxes.
It's a shame what happen to Fruit of The Loom and to Brundidge. The government can't put every company on life support, I can't afford it.
Post a comment (Terms of Use Policy)
(Requires free registration.)