with an incumbent. In an open race it could get a little dicey….in a year other than 2010.

I am not really advocating we throw Pete Sessions out of Congress

You repeated that thought twice and it falls well short of a ringing endorsement of Session’s continued Congressional career. It seems that while you may not be pushing for him to be thrown out in the primary, you would not shed a lot of tears if that were the outcome.

I’d like to see him gone just for the rather shallow reason that everytime I hear his name, it makes me think people are disparaging Jeff Sessions who along with Jim Demint is one of my heros.

…that a spanking awaits if they don’t start behaving.

Wayward politicians need a similar reminder from time to time.

While I am very disappointed with the Scozzafava debacle, I’ve generally been very pleased with his representation. I’m not sure what to think of this challenger yet, but I know I don’t want anything to jeopardize this district remaining Republican.

I live in the district and yes it is a safe GOP district. The two reasons you give for primarying him are a little loose.

No question the Scozzafava incident is a problem, however as the head of the NRCC (a thankless job I might add) he was given the candidate by the local Party members. Sure he could/should have done a more thorough background check on her, but as NRCC head it is not a good thing to be second guessing local party members. Always remember the shoe could always be on the other foot thats why we want the NRCC and NRSC to stay out of local party politics (see Florida senate seat).

Secondly the TARP vote is a problem, not because of the initial vote to allow the first $350 mil (of which the first moneys that went out will almost assuredly be repaid with interest and did wonders for the banking industry at that critical momont), it is the second $350 that Obama requested Bush ask for as he was leaving office. That money became nothing more than a slush fund for Obama supporters; GE, GM/UAW, SEIU….

You/we may have our differences with Sessions, but to consider him the problem with the Republican Party is misguided.

a change in party leadership is Massachussettes. Stumbled across this quote this morning…
MA Republican Party spokesman Barney Keller - “We did not recruit Mr. Sholley to run for office, Barney Frank has been at the center of the financial meltdown and it’s important for voters to know he’s now trying to fix what he had a hand in breaking.”
http://www.boston.com/news/local/articles/2008/10/12/sholley_presses_lonely_battle_against_frank/?page=2

I moved a little north of his district, but lived in it and walked door to door for him when he beat that total jack___ martin frost.
He committed 2 MAJOR errors in judgment, and for that he has earned a primary challenge.

He has been a fairly reliable Congressman, but he messed up and he and others need a message sent to them.

It may not work, but I’m betting on getting something of a deterrent effect. Those rat turds think they are safe because they’ve gerrymandered their districts to the party, but we need to teach them that voters get to pick within the party too.

If we shoot a few of them down in the primary and still keep the district, we can call a little come to Jesus meeting with the rest of them and convince them that one election does not equate to lifetime tenure.

And for insurance, I still want to move the capitol (on a rotating basis) to N. Dakota (in the winter), Kansas (summer or winter), New Mexico (summer), etc. And eliminate any and all pensions. And throw a few of them off the rotunda occasionally.

I’ve lived in TX-32 since the district lines changed, and conservative Republicans have been trying to find someone to challenge Pete Sessions for at least the past 2 election cycles.

Rumor has it that any Republican to challenge him will win the primary.

There are a couple of reasons: first of all, his Las Vegas fundraisers don’t sit too well with our members in Texas Eagle Forum. We want to know why he doesn’t hold fundraisers at one of the many upscale banquet rooms in the district and hold fundraisers that are more in keeping with his image as a family values Republican.

Secondly, there are his ongoing ethical issues; this election cycle, he’s accepted quite a lot of money from casino owners and professional poker players. He’s also trying to loosen regulations for online gaming, which does not fit in with our district’s interests.

He’s also given a rather large earmark to a Chicago dirigible company, which, apparently, has never made a dirigible before. We want to know why he did that, and how it benefits our district–if it does at all.

There are many, many more moral and ethical problems with Pete Sessions, and we’re long overdue for a primary challenger. David Smith will probably win the primary and go on to represent us in Congress, which will be quite a good change, having someone who works for us instead of for lobbyists that don’t represent our district’s best interests.

I’ve defended Sessions on these boards from the prospect of a purge…but he did goof big time in NY 23.

If that earns him a primary challenger, so be it. Any Congressman should be ready to deal with a primary challenge.