Dave Lewis longs for the Ayatollahs

Maybe . . . (0.00 / 0)

Matt could get him to wear one of those "God Guns and Gays, Love em All" t-shirts when he issues his apology.

---

by: Cece @ Wed Aug 29, 2007 at 14:44:37 PM CDT

Will you lefties lighten' up here...... (0.00 / 0)

Dave Lewis is a friend of mine, he's a very reasonable, rational straight man, and I think what he was saying is a bit tongue-in-cheek if you will. In anybody's book the actions of Sen. Craig are revolting. IF he had a lick of common sense he'd be submitting his resignation immediately and packing up his stuff and moving back to wherever he can go with a new identity. Dave is right about how these folks would be handled in Iran, he's NOT suggesting we do that in the good ol' USofA, you're missing his point, Sen. Craig's behavior is offensive to Sen. Lewis like it is the majority of us who find this kind of behavior from anyone, Republican, Democrat, Independent or otherwise nauseating. Pack up and go Sen. Craig, the United States Senate doesn't need you. Thanks Dave for weighing in on this one, You're Dead Right On!

---

by: Interested @ Wed Aug 29, 2007 at 14:56:11 PM CDT

Poor Choice of Friends (0.00 / 0)

I admire you for supporting your friend, but I question your choice of friends.  I too have a personal connection to Dave Lewis, and know of several instances where he has lied and demeaned others to further his political agenda. 

---

by: Curmudgeon @ Wed Aug 29, 2007 at 15:07:23 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Curmudgeon you're well named..... (0.00 / 0)

And quite frankly I don't believe one word of that nonsense. You may not agree with Sen. Lewis, you may not support his politics or his philosophy but I'd stake my own reputation that he's ever lied to anyone about anything during his political career. Dave has served honorably in both Republican and Democratic Administrations, I don't agree with Dave on all issues, but I absolutely do not believe he lies to further his own personal or political agenda. Dave Lewis is a good citizen, husband, father and grandfather and to put out accusations like that only hurts your credibility. If you are personally connected to Dave I suggest you ring him up and talk it out, he's a fine Christian man and I know he'd be pleased to talk with you. The reason Dave is not in the spotlight is because he does not seek the spotlight, he is a humble man who knows what he is about, does the work that needs to be done for his constituents and doesn't seek the press for his actions. Reasonable folks like Dave neither seek or shun the press for they have nothing to run away from or be ashamed of. If the Montana political scene had more men and women of political integrity of Dave Lewis who has no 'agenda' only the good of the whole in mind we'd all be a lot better off.

---

by: Interested @ Wed Aug 29, 2007 at 16:40:10 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Unquestioned Loyalty (0.00 / 0)

Dave Lewis is lucky to have a friend like you.  The incidents I mentioned happened locally during his unsuccessful efforts to derail zoning in the Helena Valley when he most definitely had a personal and political agenda.  I personally heard him tell blatant lies about the effect of proposed legislation.  I also question his character based on certain dealings he has had with his neighbors which I will not repeat since they from reliable but second hand sources.  Dave Lewis is no saint.

---

by: Curmudgeon @ Wed Aug 29, 2007 at 17:33:10 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

that wasn't light? (0.00 / 0)

I thought my post was kinda funny...I certainly didn't attack his person, just his willingness to add to this idea of Kulturkampf, which I think inane.

---

by: Jay Stevens @ Wed Aug 29, 2007 at 19:58:57 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Another moron (0.00 / 0)

It's about time the spotlight fell on Dave Lewis.  So far he has escaped attention only because the more egregious nut cases have hogged the limelight.

---

by: Curmudgeon @ Wed Aug 29, 2007 at 14:59:28 PM CDT

Regardless (0.00 / 0)

Apparently personal issues run high as regards Lewis.  However, whether he said it tongue in cheek or not, he posited a paradox that we as a nation are coming ever closer to having to deal with.  How can we claim the moral high ground when our morality is the clone, the doppleganger, of that of the enemy?

Notice these things:

a)  Lewis didn't claim to be offended by Larry Craig's behavior, but rather by his "existence".

b)  He laments that not that perverts are among us, but that they are predominately Republican, and that means they are either stupid *or* more populous among said party.  The implications are wide open, but still rather focused on two things:  Republicans attract the corrupt (entirely possible), or that Republican perverts are dumber than Democratic perverts.  This leads me to believe that Lewis was being facetious, because the latter is non-sensicle, and the former is not something a Republican would write about his own party, unless he himself has misgivings about the hold of religious authoritarianism over his chosen brethren.

Either way, I wonder this:  since the story is out there, why in the hell doesn't the press just ask him what the hell he meant?  Anybody?

---

by: Wulfgar @ Wed Aug 29, 2007 at 18:22:32 PM CDT

Good Question (0.00 / 0)

My response to your excellent question is "What press?"  Perhaps the press from Great Falls, Missoula or Plentywood.  Certainly no press representative from Helena has any interest or intention of reporting anything that hasn't been sanitized, prepackaged and guaranteed not to offend its advertisers. 

---

by: Curmudgeon @ Wed Aug 29, 2007 at 18:49:38 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

the press... (0.00 / 0)

to be fair to the press, you had to muck around in wingnuttia to get this comment. Let's see where it goes from here.

---

by: Jay Stevens @ Wed Aug 29, 2007 at 20:00:26 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Kudos (0.00 / 0)

I agree, and applaud your efforts to ferret this out.  Let's see what happens from here.  Perhaps this situation might open a thread about the pitiful (IMHO) excuse for press coverage in Montana.

---

by: Curmudgeon @ Wed Aug 29, 2007 at 20:22:51 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Gee whiz... (0.00 / 0)

I didn't read Jay's post as a 'hit' of any kind on Dave Lewis. The linkage between forest management and 'morality' is a stretch for me, too (as per Jay's post). That is more than a little incoherent, in my book. That said, my interactions with Dave Lewis squares with what 'Interested' says above. I don't know what the beef is between 'Curmudgeon' and Dave Lewis, but this is one of those 'blogosphere' commentary attacks on someone that I think is totally out of line. OK, so Dave Lewis took a different position on a particular issue with 'Curmudgeon.' Give it a rest! I don't personally care if Dave Lewis is 'a good Christian,' a good 'Jew,' a 'good Muslim,' a good 'Buddhist,' a good 'atheist,' or whatever. My own personal experience with Dave Lewis is that he is a good human being. I don't think Jay Stevens suggested anything to the contrary.

---

by: Bob @ Wed Aug 29, 2007 at 23:44:58 PM CDT

Lots worse Republicans than Dave Lewis (0.00 / 0)

I've known Dave Lewis for more than 20 years in his capacity as Budget Director for several governors, both Ds and Rs, and now in his role as a Senator and I have to tell ya, there are a lot worse Republicans out there than Dave Lewis.  He has always been straight up with me on budget information, has carried bills for me, and has never bent the truth.

While I know nothing about his personal life, his religious preference, or what he's done or not done on the Helena Valley Zoning issue , I think what we saw with that post of his was simply Lewis laying it out the way he sees it.  No Republican could be proud of what Larry Craig did -- only Lewis had the guts to put it in writing.  Maybe they'll roll over a lot of rocks and dig up some dirt on Dave, but for now, he truly is one of the more reasonable, ethical, intelligent and politically experienced Repubs in the Capitol.  I just think this particular issue really disgusted him.

---

by: ochenski @ Thu Aug 30, 2007 at 13:36:32 PM CDT

No one said he was. (0.00 / 0)

I don't think anyone here said that Senator Lewis was the worst Republican in the state. There are far more, and we know it. I believe the point in this post was to point out that there is an issue out there that Dave Lewis gets so outraged by that he would "long" for totalitarianism over democracy. That is a very serious thing to say, and it does say a lot about what kind of person he is. Those are his words, and if he doesn't expect people to react to what he says then he should keep his mouth shut. You of all people should know that.

---

by: Mathello @ Thu Aug 30, 2007 at 15:57:53 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Ochesnski........I Love ya' (0.00 / 0)

Never thought I'd agree with you on much but this one you're right on.....Mathello, get a life, Dave never said he longed for totalitarainism over democracy, you lefties crack me up, stop majoring in the minors and get over yourself!

---

by: Interested @ Thu Aug 30, 2007 at 16:18:48 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

"makes me think longingly of the Ayotollahs in Iran." (0.00 / 0)

Hmmm... Sorry I must have been confused.

---

by: Mathello @ Thu Aug 30, 2007 at 16:35:36 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Your silly derision to the side (0.00 / 0)

Mathello is somewhat correct.  Taken literally, at face value, Lewis said *exactly* that he longs for the Theocracy of Mullahs over our Democratic form of the rule of law.  One can argue that Theocracy is not totalitarianism (and in Iran, I'm not certain that it is).  Regardless, Lewis did offer the idea that church and state be one, with church making law, and state violently enforcing it.  That's exactly what he said, and it's not at all 'minor' to take it at face value.

Now, do you care to step up to the plate in this big league show, and defend that view as reasonable, Interested? 

---

by: Wulfgar @ Thu Aug 30, 2007 at 18:08:22 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Which shoe, which foot, what press? (0.00 / 0)

Excuse me for stepping in front of 'Interested' here, but I notice some inconsistency and/or hypocrisy in demands for press coverage of the off-handed blog comment by Dave Lewis. For example:

"I wonder this:  since the story is out there, why in the hell doesn't the press just ask him what the hell he meant?  Anybody?"
...

"To the young woman in the nice sedan with all the feminist bumper stickers:  No, I didn't assert my parking lot authority because I'm a man and you're just a lowly female.  I did it because ... my vehicle weighs 4 and a half tons ... yours doesn't. To the backwards hat studly wannabe riding my ass in the sweet cherry red Chevy half-ton:  Kitten, you ain't gonna intimidate me.  Didn't I just mention that my vehicle weighs 4 and half tons ... and yours doesn't?"
...

"...it's not at all 'minor' to take it at face value."

Film at Eleven?

---

by: Bob @ Thu Aug 30, 2007 at 21:15:12 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

??? (0.00 / 0)

Er...what does Wulfgar!'s comment have to do with anything?

---

by: Jay Stevens @ Thu Aug 30, 2007 at 21:58:35 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Sorry if I was too cryptic, but... (1.00 / 1)

If Wulfgar believes that Dave Lewis should be subject to press scrutiny because of his off-handed blog comment: "The thought of a US Senator chasing love in all the wrong places makes me think longingly of the Ayatollahs in Iran. They would just kill the turkey [Larry Craig]"...should not the same press scrutiny be warranted with regard to Wulfgar's in-your-face vehicular machismo? Lewis and Wulfgar are both letting off steam in the face of frustrating situations, it seems to me, and neither warrants further media examination. I agree with George Ochenski: "I just think this particular issue [Larry Craig's public toilet adventure] really disgusted [Dave Lewis]." Is my point clearer in this rewrite, Jay?

---

by: Bob @ Thu Aug 30, 2007 at 23:48:40 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

.... (0.00 / 0)

I read Wulfgar's post about 9 times just to make sure he didn't use the word "press". I don't think he did. This is blog scrutiny. And besides public officials don't get the luxury to blow off steam in a public forum. They should expect to get this kind of treatment everytime they open thier mouths. It goes with the territory and Senator Lewis has been in public service long enough to know this.

Sorry about my use of the word "totalitarianism" earlier. I don't see how a theocracy can avoid it given enough time.

---

by: Mathello @ Fri Aug 31, 2007 at 00:01:45 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Quoting Wulfgar and respondents... (0.00 / 0)

August 29 (above): "I wonder this: since the story is out there, why in the hell doesn't the press just ask him [Dave Lewis] what the hell he meant?"

Wulfgar's comment is followed by three replies: two from Curmudgeon and one from Jay Stevens. Both respondents use the word "press" repeatedly in their replies to Wulfgar: Curmudgeon uses "press" four times, Jay twice (including in the bold-faced subject line of his reply).

As for theocracy and totalitarianism, Mathello, you don't owe me an apology. I think a good case can be made that theocracy is inherently totalitarian. I might even point to the quasi-theocracy of G.W. Bush as a budding form of totalitarianism in our beloved United States.

---

by: Bob @ Fri Aug 31, 2007 at 01:10:53 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Two things Bob, (0.00 / 0)

1)  When the fuck did I become an elected official instead of just a blogger?  And what I wrote was *exactly* meant to be taken at face value.  So much for your bullshit about "inconsistency" or "hypocrisy".

2)  Since Lewis is an elected official and wrote something in a public forum that could shed light on his views of public policy, why shouldn't someone from the press just ask him what he meant?  That's not unreasonable at all.  Your preemptive and assumptive defense of him certainly is.

---

by: Wulfgar @ Fri Aug 31, 2007 at 08:33:27 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

I gotcha... (0.00 / 0)

My bad on the press thing. I see where you were at.

---

by: Mathello @ Fri Aug 31, 2007 at 11:34:05 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

No defense meant (0.00 / 0)

For what it's worth, I didn't post my comment about Lewis to defend his comment, just to reflect on what I know of the person and why I thought he said what he said.  Personally, I think anyone that believes Dave Lewis really longs for totalitarian control over democracy simply doesn't know the guy and is stretching his comment to the limit.

As for the press asking Dave what he meant, well, what could be better than getting it straight from the horse's mouth?  Sure they ought to ask him -- isn't that the job of the press, after all?  Or maybe it's such a non-issue with others that the sum of what we can ever expect to find out about it is whatever we come up with here arguing with each other over theoretical reasons for Lewis' actual motivations. 

Tell ya' what, blogger pals, I'll just forward all this stuff to him in an email and ask him myself.  Then we'll see what he says and post it here.  Anybody got a problem with that approach to trying to get to the truth?

---

by: ochenski @ Fri Aug 31, 2007 at 09:14:13 AM CDT

Dave Lewis responds to Ochenski email (3.00 / 1)

Well pards, Dave wrote back and here's what he had to say.

"The Ayatollah comment was over the top and just testifies to the degree of frustration I have with high level officials and truly stupid behavior.  As I said earlier, I really don't care if he is gay but for goodness sake, as a country, we deserve to have U.S. Senators that are willing to think about their position of leadership in our culture.  Embarrassing and stupid behavior is unacceptable.  It demeans the office and the country they serve."

Dave

---

by: ochenski @ Fri Aug 31, 2007 at 12:43:46 PM CDT

Keep it in print Ochenski (0.00 / 0)

Nice to see ochenski helping a Republican save face. Way to 'rattle the cage of the establishment.'

By the way, which party do you support anyhow? I get confused when you spend all your time and cage-rattling street cred slamming democrats at every turn.

---

by: bootney lee fawnsworth @ Fri Aug 31, 2007 at 17:00:07 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Credibility isn't just a big word (0.00 / 0)

Sorry to bum you out for saying anything reasonable about Dave Lewis.  Then again, I suspect you haven't known him and worked with him for as long as I have.

Credibility isn't just a big word, it goes to the real issues and, on this one, Dave screwed up, admitted it, and I'm a little puzzled as to what I did that could possibly be construed as "slamming democrats at every turn."

---

by: ochenski @ Fri Aug 31, 2007 at 17:34:27 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Oh Crumudgeon.... (0.00 / 1)

You set off a fire storm, don't be such a sore loser, Lewis beat you fair and square, it's a new day in Montana. (Gov. Brian says so), I hope you and wulgar and mathello have a nice Labor Day weekend, I think you all need a day off to get the stress and tension under control.

---

by: Interested @ Fri Aug 31, 2007 at 14:49:06 PM CDT

Geeze, Fella..... (0.00 / 0)

Give it a rest.  I've never been in competition with Dave Lewis over anything.  My comments were not based on his political posture, but on my experience with him as a human being.  Given your unquestioning loyalty you should consider taking a job in DC with the Bush League.  Make big money in your spare time. I understand there are several openings.

---

by: Curmudgeon @ Fri Aug 31, 2007 at 15:21:55 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Interested (0.00 / 0)

Piss off.  All I did was post a simple comment showing that Lewis' comment could be taken in several ways, including facetious.  I suggested that the press might actually bother to do their job and ask him about it.  (Thank you George.  Good job.)

For this I have Bob trolling my website to 'discredit me' as if I have the power to make public policy.  He suggests "inconsistency" and "hypocrisy" when he didn't even understand what I was writing.  To him, it was "machismo".  Sorry, it was laws of the land and the laws of physics.  One might assume Bob considers those "machismo" as well.  Idiot.

And now you suggest to some "wulgar" that I get stress and tension under control?  Learn to read, asshole.  The only stress I'm under is from falsely superior pissants such as yourself who appear to take any questioning of your friend as affront.  He's a goddamned state Senator who said something that could be taken very easily the wrong way.  I suggested that somebody ask him, and now I have intellectual midgets suggesting that I take it easy.  That might up the stress level for anybody, I'm thinking.  And I still notice that you haven't defended what Lewis  said. 

Like I said before, piss off.

---

by: Wulfgar @ Fri Aug 31, 2007 at 17:15:11 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Friends - (0.00 / 0)

---

by: ochenski @ Fri Aug 31, 2007 at 17:20:39 PM CDT

Friends - (0.00 / 0)

I figured Dave wrote that in a different state of mind that what it was being taken as and his comment pretty much confirms that.  No real need for us to whack each other around over the speculation.  As in most things, a little footwork and going right to the source brought some more understanding to the situation.

For my part, I don't blame people for thinking it was a dumb comment -- it was.  Even Dave admitted that, which is commendable for a politician since they never seem to be able to say three simple words: I was wrong.  Not Bill Clinton, not Bush,and sure as hell not Larry Craig.

For those who know Dave, his comment was obviously out of the ordinary for the kind of guy he is.  Unfortunately, he is being skewered on Daily Kos right now by people who have no idea who he is.  Maybe rightly, maybe way out there.  I don't really know.  But I know one thing, Dave isn't the American Taliban.  He was just pissed off at one of his own (Republicans) doing such stupid shit.  And being pissed off, as this thread reveals, is not something Dave has the market cornered on these days.

Hang tight, pals.  We all need each other here in Montana.  -GO

---

by: ochenski @ Fri Aug 31, 2007 at 17:25:39 PM CDT

He actually gained a fan (0.00 / 0)

His response had two things I like.

1)  He admitted that his comment was "over the top".  That almost never happens on either side of the aisle.

2)  He lent validity to the word "stupid".  Almost every Republican I deal with disdains the word, stupidly attacks its use as "ad Hominem" (as if they have any clue what that means), and vehemently suggests that the user is more wicked for using it then the stupid who demand its use.  For Lewis to use it boldly and forthrightly is a plus in my mind. 

---

by: Wulfgar @ Fri Aug 31, 2007 at 17:33:44 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Straight up (0.00 / 0)

Wulfgar lays it out straight up.  People make mistakes.  Rare individuals admit them.  Dave did.  Like I said earlier, I've known Dave for a long time and it just didn't sound like something he would normally say...which is why I emailed him personally and received and posted his response.  Good for you, Wulfgar, to realize what it took to write that response. Ain't a helluva lot of politicians on either side of the line that would do it.

---

by: ochenski @ Fri Aug 31, 2007 at 17:37:56 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Way to go, GO! (0.00 / 0)

You did a great job here, George! If I sit back and pretend that I don't know Dave Lewis, I can see why people (including Wulfgar!) would take his Ayatollah comment in the way that they did/are doing. As you point out, it's the fact of knowing Dave that makes his off-the-cuff comment so "over the top." Dave's annoyance with Craig registers high on the Richter scale as to how pissed off Dave was when he posted his Ayatollah comment. I forget that there's that Mike Lange character out there making an ass of himself, so with that in mind it's easier for me to understand why Dave got himself slapped around on this occasion. Thanks again, GO! You are now a card-carrying cage-rattling peacemaker!

---

by: Bob @ Fri Aug 31, 2007 at 18:21:16 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Clueless (0.00 / 0)

You obviously don't have clue *1* how I 'took' it, Bob.  An apology might be in order ... but I won't hold my breath.

---

by: Wulfgar @ Fri Aug 31, 2007 at 18:29:54 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Ariadne's Thread (and Wulfgar's): An Apology? (0.00 / 0)

Get over it boy. You fucked up with regard to Dave Lewis. You have already apologized. None further needed.

---

by: Bob @ Fri Aug 31, 2007 at 22:05:46 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Bob, (0.00 / 0)

---

by: Wulfgar @ Sat Sep 01, 2007 at 13:50:27 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

I didn't apologize (0.00 / 0)

And certainly not to you.  If you think I was ever "wrong" about Lewis then you have serious reading comprehension problems.  All I said was "ask him", and for that you go off about hypocrisy and inconsistency.  You owe me the apology, and yourself some basic reading lessons.

Personally, I think you're still pissed off because of your incompetence at covering your ass over at Piece of Mind.  Every moron on the Internet who gets caught using the same IP for different personas wails about "someone else used my computer".  That's about as believable as Larry Craig's wide stance.  Why you've decided to be a dickhead to me about it, I haven't a clue.  But bring it on, kitten.

---

by: Wulfgar @ Sat Sep 01, 2007 at 13:57:44 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Apology (0.00 / 0)

Wulfgar, I enjoy reading what you post. I apologize if I offended you. As for your Piece of Mind reference, there were two comments posted there some time ago that were not done by me. Mark T. understands that. That issue is history. Keep on keepin' on.

---

by: Bob @ Sat Sep 01, 2007 at 15:20:30 PM CDT

[ Parent ]