Here’s the clip for the February edition of In-Depth Delaware featuring hosts Liz Allen and Karen Hartley-Nagle.
Posted by Mike Matthews in First State Filth
February 19th, 2008
In-Depth Delaware clip
Possibly Related
-
- In-Depth Delaware, July Edition
- In-Depth Delaware, February edition
- In-Depth Delaware, August 2008
- June In-Depth Delaware
- In-Depth Delaware, March 2008
- Tune in to In-Depth Delaware, April Edition
- In-Depth Delaware, May Edition
- A great show always highlights the real news: Bloggers
- Tune In To In-Depth Delaware
- Karen Hartley-Nagle announces run for US Congress
38 Responses to “In-Depth Delaware clip”
-
Sussex Countian says:
Sussex Countian,
I heard on WGMD this morning that Randy Nelson may be running for State Rep. against Gerald Hocker. The audio from this clip of Karen Hartley-Nagle and Randy Nelson was played and a staged poll was taken. I am in Randy’s district and he has my vote and my family and friend’s full support if he runs. How can I contact him? Randy there is money available for a campaign if you decide to throw your hat in the ring.
Randy, if you see this, can you post contact information? When you were on the air you spoke the truth and did not go along to get along. Often, you were more informed than many of the politicians you interviewed and you know what is important to us. When you go to Legislative Hall I know you will represent our interests not special interests. We need your help in Sussex County. Randy please run for the House seat! We need a bright, articulate legislator representing us.February 20th, 2008 at 10:05 am -
Sussex Countian says:
I heard on WGMD this morning that Randy Nelson may be running for State Rep. against Gerald Hocker. The audio from this clip of Karen Hartley-Nagle and Randy Nelson was played and a staged poll was taken. I am in Randy’s district and he has my vote and my family and friend’s full support if he runs. How can I contact him? Randy there is money available for a campaign if you decide to throw your hat in the ring.
Randy, if you see this, can you post contact information? When you were on the air you spoke the truth and did not go along to get along. Often, you were more informed than many of the politicians you interviewed and you know what is important to us. When you go to Legislative Hall I know you will represent our interests not special interests. We need your help in Sussex County. Randy please run for the House seat! We need a bright, articulate legislator representing us. -
Liz allen says:
Randy Nelson would be a great legislator! He truly does have a grasp of “citizens” issues, many of them we didn’t have time to get into on the program. He is bright, and speaks the truth without concern for the go along to get along politics we despise.
We thank Randy and Alan Mueller for coming on the program to speak on behalf of all Delawareans and issues the citizens want addressed.
One of Hockers supporters actually called into WGMD five times this morning which shows how afraid Hockers supporters are of Randy Nelson.
Hocker is one who is in the Harris McDowell camp attempting to distort wind power and stalling the will of the people: 90% of citizens support wind power!
It’s time for more Randy Nelson’s to jump into the race and run against these entrenched corporate henchmen.
-
Joe M. says:
Great show!
-
Dana Garrett says:
I’m glad that Liz & Karen have this show. I do hope, however, that Karen will declare the costs of the show on her campaign finance reports since she is using them to talk about her campaign.
Does anyone know if there are equal time requirements for the other candidates as well?
-
TPN says:
There is no such thing as “equal time” on paid local access. In fact it is the whole point of it. Pay to play.
It would be like saying that broadcast stations have to give away equal commercial time to other candidates when one candidate buys commercial spots…
-
Nancy Willing says:
I sent the message above on to Randy today via Joan Deaver. I think that there is a lot of love for him down state and money and support enough to get him into office.
-
TPN says:
Also, since I only watched it when it aired, did Karen talk about her campaign on the show? I don’t recall that. I know she had about 10 seconds of subtitle naming her as a candidate but was there a point she talked about her campaign or solicited support or contributions? Seriously I am asking…
-
Did I say that? says:
If Karen uses Liz’s part of the show to campaign, as in Liz asks “How is the Campaign doing?”, then the cost of that question is on Liz. There is no equal time requirements, this is not public TV, it is Liz Allen’s Show. Look how many non-profits hide behind the ‘Voter-education’ technique.
If the cost of the show is shared, and Karen uses her half to interview guests, then it is not campaigning.Dana, Perhaps you could review the Helene Keeley and John Carney bill boards on ratings for computer games. Is that campaigning? Where did the money come from? Public funds? Private? Why those two?
Can Helene still consider running for Lt Gov?
Can she run for BOTH her rep seat and Lt G? -
Did I say that? says:
The eclipse must be affecting me.
I went out to howl at the moon, but it was all red.I looked up the tonights phenomenon. That bright spot next to the moon is Saturn.
I was afraid it was Uranus.
-
TPN says:
I am glad you reminded me of those billboards! I did a double take at Penn Avenue and Union on the north side of the railroad bridge over the weekend. I saw something I had never seen : a giant billboard with John Carney’s picture on it. As I got closer I realized it was some kind of BS PSA.
My immediate thought was : oh how convenient, just in time for his gubernatorial campaign.
This kind of conveniently timed flagrant political self-promotion on either 1) the taxpayer’s or 2) a non-profit’s dime by Carney sealed my view that he is absolutely part of the problem and a danger to any good government progress for Delaware’s future.
The gall of this guy. He must think voters are really stupid in Delaware.
But then they elected his ass twice, along with Ruth Ann, didn’t they?
God help us all we may be at the mercy of a mass of voting booth idiots no matter what we do.
-
Dana Garrett says:
I was under the impression that Karen was a regular co-host on the show and not a guest being asked how the campaign is going. In fact when I appeared on the show I was told that she was a co-host.
And Karen is asking questions of the announced guests on the show posted above. That’s odd for a guest to do–ask questions of the other guests just like Liz does. If she is a co-host and is going to use part of the show as a live campaign commercial, shouldn’t she declare it?
Also, how is the show funded? By contributions? If so, should all or part of the contributions be counted toward her campaign? If Liz is funding the show, should Liz be listed as contributer, perhaps an in-kind contributor, and if so, at what point does Liz reach her max donation to Karen’s campaign
Good to hear that paid local access doesn’t have an equal time requirement. It’s such a nascent citizen-based movement that I hope it can develop & strengthen for a while before serious questions about regulation are raised.
-
Dana Garrett says:
“Dana, Perhaps you could review the Helene Keeley and John Carney bill boards on ratings for computer games. Is that campaigning?”
I’m sorry. I haven’t seen the billboards. Do they mention anything about their campaigns?
-
TPN says:
It’s such a nascent citizen-based movement that I hope it can develop & strengthen for a while before serious questions about regulation are raised.”
Amen to such a movement.
It is, for all intents and purposes, a paid cable-broadcast YouTube.
YouTube as a basic concept is a free, albeit on-demand, broadcast of citizen-generated content across the entire spectrum of culture.
Should it be regulated? Should it raise “serious questions about regulation”?
If You Tube should not be regulated, then why should merely-local broadcast content that is not free but actually paid-for by interested, concerned or active citizens EVER be subject to ANY “regulation”?
What tyranny could possess the hubris to dare raise “serious” questions towards regulating privately-paid speech that patently seeks to inform, arouse, elicit, or offer discourse of any kind in matters of public interest?
Who cares if such citizen-generated communication is on YouTube for free (via the broadband Comcast internet) or paid for by content creators (via Comcast cable television).
Maybe such questions of speech content “regulation” are appropriate where false or exaggerated claims combine with personal profit, but they are not…at last anywhere near the realm of political dialogue.)
The bottom line : free all channels of communication and progress will flourish.
-
Christine Pantano says:
I agree with those posting that say Randy Nelson would make a great politician. He is very well informed and has the stature, brains and charisma to win the seat.
-
Oh, NO! not again.... says:
Check out ‘Community Crossfire’ (on 28, Sunday around 8 or 9) co-hosted by Rep. Potted Plant
Norman ‘Wait, I got another scam goin’ Oliver for some political crap….the best recently is Plant calling for the return on the whipping post to Rodney Square. I can’t imagine who she thinks would be lined up for flogging but I’ll there’ll be a lot more non-white than other.. -
Carol Overland says:
Federal Equal Access application? Ask Minnesota’s former Gov. Jesse Ventura, current Gov. Tim Pawlenty, U.S. Senate candidate Al Franken, and former state Rep. Mike Osskopp, all of whom quit their talk shows when they filed and announced their campaigns (whether state or federal).
Here’s a link that sheds some light and explains it well, note the “local origination cable broadcasting” section:
http://www.broadcastlawblog.co.....-host.html -
Anon says:
So far, there are no “legally qualified candidates” for the major parties in Delaware. The two major parties have yet to set their filing fees. Therefore, unless a candidate has filed as third party candidate, they are not on the ballot and equal time is not an issue yet.
-
Susan Neal says:
Well, it did not take long for Dana Garrett/Reverend Bullock to go after Karen Hartley-Nagle. And for the cost of a monthly local access cable show where Liz starts out asking Karen how her campaign is going and Karen briefly responds. This appears petty and desperate by the Reverend Bullock campaign. Karen is very nice, a bright woman, and she speaks to the issues that are important to me. I intend to support her. Liz and Karen have a great show and I look forward to many more. Both Allen Muller and Randy Nelson were great guests and had much to offer.
With all the important national issues that can use attention, I cannot believe this is the Bullock campaign’s focus.
-
Liz allen says:
Susan:you are so right. It is obvious with all the issues at stake, with all the policies that need addressed, the Bullock campaign is focused improperly. I recall seeing a TV show of Rev. Bullock on chan 28 with his church.
He sat up on the pulpit “high” above the parishners, as if he was above them. He tapped his foot while they sang. Is he using his church people to support his candidacy…if so perhaps they should forgo their status as tax exempt.
-
Al Mascitti says:
C’mon, Liz, Dana raised an actual issue. As opposed to noting how high The Rev. Bullock’s pulpit is and whether he tapped his feet…
-
Susan Neal says:
Liz raises an important issue regarding Reverend Bullock’s campaign strategy and will his church lose their tax-exempt status as a result of his political aspirations. The rest appears to me to be just her observations of his behavior.
A candidate for office, under federal law, can hold meetings in religious facilities as long as the facilities extend the same opportunity to other candidates.
However, for tax-exempt nonprofit organizations like the Mormon and other churches federal law prohibits any advocacy on behalf of a particular candidate or party. The use of church resources for political purposes poses a potential conflict with federal law on tax-exempt institutions.
Further, in a letter sent to churches throughout the country, Americans United for Separation of Church and State reminded church leaders that Internal Revenue Service regulations forbid all tax-exempt, 501(c)(3) organizations — including churches — from promoting or endorsing candidates.
-
Liz allen says:
C’mon Al! As usual you have done no research on matter.
do a google search on Jerry Falwell…and see what happened to him and his church.
-
Liz allen says:
Excuse me it was Pat Robertson….The Christian Broadcasting Network! In the middle 1980’s his ministery supported the presidential campaign of its founder Rev. Pat Robertson. Ten years later CBN agreed in a public announcemnet and settled with the IRS by agreeing to the revocation of its tax exempt status for 86 ad 87.The revocation of the tax exempt status of three former affilates made significant payments to the IRS avoiding partisan campaign activities in the future, placing more outside directors on its board and implenenting other organizational and operational changes to insure tax law compliance.
It would help if those commenting had actually done homework on the separation of church and state and IRS rules and regulations compliance for political campaigns.
Someone should inform the pastors of these churches, that using their bully pulpits for political campaigns can bring the IRS to their door and take away their tax exempt status.
Sorry its the law!
-
Al Mascitti says:
Sorry, didn’t mean to impugn your deep “research” into foot-tapping. Other than that, you’ve got nothing, have you? What “research” did you do into his church, other than simply smearing him for having one?
I quote from your deep “research”:
“Is he using his church people to support his candidacy…if so perhaps they should forgo their status as tax exempt.”
That’s nothing but a smear. Don’t pretend it’s anything else.
-
Liz allen says:
Hey Al! Obviously you havent checked! Separation of church and state…the law Al. Smear campaign is bogus! Al, it’s you who “got nothing”.
Toe Tapping was on TV…its perception Al. It’s an endorsement or a perception of one.
I find the Youtube presentation more interesting.
Sorry Al, I’m not going to research it for you, I and others have. You might begin with the IRS rules on campaigns. In the meantime do a google on: pat robertson + IRS + campaign…
see how it worked out for him. It’s about the rules/regulations/process and what you can and can’t do, the law Al.
-
Al Mascitti says:
Everybody knows that, Liz. Are you really this clueless?
Now suppose you tell us what you have on Bullock. Nothing? What a surprise.
Really, Liz, what does your “research” consist of besides watching TV and reading stuff? Why do you think you’re the only one who does that?
By the way, using his church “people” rather than his church to support his campaign breaks no laws at all. Do a little “research,” Liz.
-
Al Mascitti says:
Now why don’t you research whether your co-host is breaking the law? Haven’t had an answer for that, have you?
-
Al Mascitti says:
This illustrates your problem in a nutshell, Liz: You seem to think you’re smarter than the average person, though there’s nothing in the way of evidence to back that up.
“Separation of church and state…the law Al.”
Do you really think everybody else is stupid, Liz? That if they disagree with you, it must be because they don’t know as much as you? It’s insufferable conceit, Liz.
“Toe Tapping was on TV…its perception Al. It’s an endorsement or a perception of one.”
Toe tapping is the perception of an endorsement? You’re really going to go with that explanation of your semi-coherent post? Now you know why nobody has engaged you in your health care crusade — just as I predicted.
By the way, you’ll know when somebody else is taking KHN’s candidacy seriously — when they bring up her personal history for discussion. This wasn’t it. She’s no more a serious candidate for high office than Mike Protack.
-
Liz allen says:
Poor Poor Al: your attention deficit disorder is showing! Just cant stay on topic Al!
You can bet the Castle campaign are very aware of the rules Al..too bad you and your comrades didnt do your homework…I will just sit by and let things unfold.
If your man doesn’t know the rules of the campaign, what kind of congressman will he be!
-
Liz allen says:
unsufferabe conceit….Al you really are reachig for straws.
Karen Hartley Nagl has broken no rule or law. Your smear campaign won’t fly, what is obvious is that as ususal you havent done your homework, so your opinion is that anyone who does is conceited!
How pathetic.
-
Al Mascitti says:
Chris Bullock isn’t my guy. And thanks for clarifying that, beyond the insults, you once again have nothing. Toe tapping! Never let it be said that YOU don’t know what’s important.
-
Liz allen says:
Al, we checked everyhing out before we ever began the show! What evidence do you have that any kaw, rule, or regulation has been broken, Its called checking the facts before inserting foot in mouth!
-
Dana Garrett says:
I asked a question about the show and that’s evidence of a strategy.
I asked Bullock about the primary. He said he welcomed the challenge, hoped there would be lively debates and pledged to work for and support the winner of the primary and, yes, even if it’s not him. He believes defeating Castle is what is important.
Now does that sound like a person who is trying to do another candidate in?
So everyone can stop w/ paranoia about my question. Someone called me today and told me definitively that there is nothing wrong w/ Karen’s appearance on the program. I’m glad to hear it.
-
Liz allen says:
WE didnt raise the question Dana! We already knew the answers!
-
Liz allen says:
Al: re the “church people”.I was/am tryng to protect them, since they could be dragged into a IRS mess. I am positive they do not know the IRS rules regarding political campaigns, and invitation of candidates who speak. These church people usually have very little money, why should the have spend it on violation of regulations they know nothing about?
-
Bill Lindewirth says:
Do you just want to be a victim of toxins?
-
Liz allen says:
Bill Lindwirth:what the hell does this comment..sounds threatening!