Montana isn’t exactly inside the beltway
Just one day later, however, Sen. Conrad Burns, R-Mont., seemed to be reading off a different script. More than nine months before Election Day, Burns, one of the GOP’s most vulnerable incumbents, launched his ‘06 media campaign with a 60-second, candidate-to-camera TV ad in which he not only mentions GOP lobbyist Jack Abramoff by name, but tacitly acknowledges that the scandal has evolved from a Beltway hoo-hah into something his constituents think matters to them.
When even Katie Freakin’ Couric isn’t buying your “Not one Dime” argument, you should know it’s time to give up.
Yes, it’s great when Katie Couric continues to shill for the right.
Indian tribes are not Abramoff’s “associates”, they are his clients. You are LYING.
If I buy a Coke, am I an “associate” of the Coca-Cola company, or am I just a customer?
The Indian Tribes donations to Dems went DOWN after Abramoff took them on as clients.
NOT ONE DIME. This is 100% a REPUBLICAN scandal.
From your own site!:
Couric: According to the Center for Responsive Politics, Abramoff and his associates gave $3 million to Republican and one — Republicans — and $1.5 million to Democrats
HoDean: Katie, not one — not one dime.
Chairman Dean truly is the gift that keeps on giving … to Republicans.
What’s your point, Farris? That Couric is a lazy know-nothing who seems to be up-to-date on the latest GOP spin?
Why does that indicate anything to you–one way or the other–about Mr. Dean?
Burns is MY senator. He is an arrogant midget whose reputation as a cattle sales auctioneer gave him traction among the wealthy land and cattle people.(see Rehberg, MT. R. Rep.)
He figures he can bluster his way through this election as he did against now governer, Brian Schweitzer. His attempts to portray himself as innocent are running up against a local press that is attempting to be truthful without being timid.
He first got elected by saying anyone that spends 12 years in the Senate becomes corrupted by the system. Burns promoised to serve only two terms and go home. But, the benefits, graft, hundred dollar hair cuts, dinner with famous people, etc., have caused a loss of memory as well. He is on the gravy train and he is not getting off without a fight.
He ran for a third term, an admission that he is also corrupted. Now he wants a fourth term. He needs it. He has made more friends in DC than he has in Montana.
No, we are talking about ZERO DOLLARS in 10 years. Democrats didn’t take a single dime from Abramoff. Republicans were the recipients of every penny of Abramoff’s donations.
Some tribes continued to donate to Democrats even after they became Abramoff clients.
You are lying again.
Look, if you can believe that Katie Couric is left of center you might as well be a member of the Flat Earth Society. Whatever her political affiliation she represents the views of her class, and I’m not talking about graduating. I seem to recall that Lester Maddox was a Democrat and Bob LaFolette was a Republican. The right’s belief in the fairy tale of the leftist media just helps undercut any other arguments they put forward. Indian tribes “represented” by the convicted briber Jack Abramoff do not equal Jack Abramoff. After the tribes became associated with Abramoff they gave less money to the Dems than before. You could look it up. Is it really that hard to understand or are these ‘talking points’ just willful disinformation? As far as Dean giving it to Republicans I’ll be interested to hear what you think of his strategies after the midterm elections. The people lead (Bush approval rating 38%-Iraq war was a mistake 60%) politicians follow.
If that’s your spin, then we’re no longer talking about $3.6 Million in Abramoff money. We’re talking about $200,000 over 6 years. In other words, change George Soros fished out from under his couch cushions.
Can’t have it both ways Dems.
You don’t have the first clue what the scandal is about, do you Farris?
I thought the Washington Post was the lying liberal media?
Where in that article does it prove that Abramoff gave money to Democrats? In the Ferris bizarro world?
SF,
You’re wrong. How many different ways can this be pointed out to you. Just stop posting, you’re embarrassing yourself.
Curmudgeon;
The way they deny defeat is to declare victory, then depart the field
Unless Max Cleland and Tom Dashcle have changed parties recently…
Neither does Howard Dean, apparently.
Indian tribes have historically donated to Democratic candidates. They did so before Abramoff, they did so after they became his clients. The difference is that, under Abramoff’s direction, they began donating to Republican candidates. That is why a given tribe’s donation to a Democrat is not “directed” but a Republican one is. And that is why we’re talking amounts in the millions.
Sorry, but just because a tribe gave to Democrats before they met Abramoff doesn’t explain this.
Dean lied, pure and simple.
What’s wrong?
FACT: Dems accepted money from Abramoff clients.
FACT: Dean lied about these contributions when he said Dems took “not one dime.”
FACT: Democrats want to tar & feather Republicans with receiving “millions of dollars from Abramoff”, yet if Dems are going by the standard of “Indian Tribes don’t count” in order to escape culpability, the dollars associated w/ the Abramoff scandal drops precipitously.
FACT: Republicans are liable for the brunt of the scandal.
FACT: Dems aren’t clean either, yet they’re unwilling to admit it.
I have this problem when I talk to my conservative co-workers also. They have a fundamental inability to distinguish acceptible political spin (factual statements which accentuate the positives, while leaving it to your opponent to point out the negatives, ie. “Bush is proposing to lower the retirement age for social security” while leaving it to the other side to say that it’s only for those who are younger than 55 right now) and lies (”Abramoff and his associates gave money to the Dems”). And with this there is no way to spin it so they just lie. They can’t say “Dems accepted money from Abramoff clients” because it’s so easy to blast out of the water as hypocritical. So they just lie and change the entire debate. Wouldn’t you if you had the media trained in the “don’t be a stickler, you know what I meant so lay off” school of journalism?
TomY-Your argument against abetting illegal influence peddling won’t hold water with S-F. Like many a lottery ticket buyer he imagines that he’s on the gravy train too. In the end he’ll suffer the same fate as the tribal councils, anti-gay marriage whackos, prayer in school advocates, etc. etc., who the Republicans view as a fundraising ATM. Rattle the bars and get some cash out of ‘em but once the dust settles ignore and belittle them. The rich man is not your friend………
Hey, I can get behind the idea that there are dirty Democrats, and even some connected to Abramoff. I can also get behind the fact that Republicans bear the overwhelming guilt in this case. But Dean didn’t lie when he said no Democrats got money from Abramoff. But the Republican strategy on this from the beginning has been to muddy the waters as much as possible in order to make this scandal seem bipartisan. And it isn’t. Abramoff was selling access to the powerful in Washington. And the powerful in Washington these days all have a big (R) by their names. Not only that, but the Republican leadership got to where it is precisely because of it’s comfort selling access, and because of using that salesmanship to make lobbying into a wholly Republican affair. This is a calculated strategy on the part of the GOP that helps them win a base of power in Washington and also to maintain party discipline internally. As a scandal, it has next to nothing to do with the Democratic party at all, and every time you GOP apologists come into one of these threads to vomit forth your “Dems are corrupt too!!” nonsense, you directly aid and abet this type of systemic corruption.
Fact; Several democratic legislators occasionally enjoy a round of golf.
Fact-Henry Ford’s business took money from businesses ‘associated’ with the Nazi Party before WWII! Henry Ford was a Nazi?
Fact-”Not one dime from Jack Abramoff” went to Dems.
Fact-Indian tribes continued to donate to Dems, who they had a long established, well documented relationship with, even after they began donating to convicted briber and publicly documented Republican fundraiser Jack Abramoff.
Fact- Save Farris is not being truthful in his postings on this subject.
Fact-No matter how hard you try you can’t pin accepting money from convicted briber Jack Abramoff on the Dems. Publicly documented facts do not support your position.
“Out, damned spot!” Lady McBeth
http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/007536.php
Gotta love Abramoff’s own bio from hiw old law firm: “Jack is directly involved in the Republican party and conservative movement leadership structures and is one of the leading fund raisers for the party and its congressional candidates.”
Thanks for proving my point: you have no idea what the scandal is about.
Did Democrats receive campaign fund contributions from Indian tribes?
Yes, absolutely.
Is the scandal involving Mr. Abramoff about campaign contributions?
Not remotely.
Did Mr. Abramoff give money to Democrats?
Never.
Did clients of Mr. Abramoff give money to Democrats?
See above.
Did Mr. Abramoff instruct his clients to give campaign contributions to Democrats?
It would seem so, based on the Washington Post’s reporting?
So the Democrats are involved in the scandal too?
No.
Why not?
The scandal isn’t about campaign contributions. It’s about fraud, money-laundering, and bribery. Mr. Abramoff defrauded his clients, laundered the money through fake nonprofits, and funnelled it to Republicans. Republicans only.
Isn’t accepting a campaign contribution the same thing as accepting a bribe?
Were you born yesterday?
I love it. Save tries to smear Dems by pointing to an article the provides a most succinct description of the utter whorish hypocrisy of the Religious right:
“Abramoff also worked with former Christian Coalition director Ralph Reed to whip up anti-gambling fervor in Louisiana. In the e-mail below, Abramoff tells his associate Michael Scanlon that Reed had recruited evangelical leader James Dobson to provide radio ads opposing any more casinos, and that Abramoff would send Reed money to pay for the ads.”
Reed and Dobson both whip up anti-gambling righteousness to benefit an Indian casino that paid them well for their services?
Wait, look over there, Democrats received legal campaign contributions.
Funny thing about that list from the Washington Post that Farris linked a while ago…this one.
The little snippet from the list includes the names of three Democrats who were supposedly on a list titled “Coushatta Requests”: Carnahan, Cleland, and Daschle.
If you go look at the opensecrets.org database, you find that Carnahan and Daschle never received any money from the Coushatta tribe. Cleland, listed for $2000 on the list shown in the Post, received $500.
Like I said…funny.
Here’s one of the photos the WH is reluctant to release.
http://photos1.blogger.com/blogger/8045/1753/1600/bush_abramoff2.jpg
It’s working
‘cleo, are you being funny? Or did your link break?
Yeah, blogger doesn’t allow you in unless you’re on the blog. Can you either post the blog or email me the pic, pls.
Weird. Must be at your end.
Anyway, it’s a photoshop of “Goodfellas” with Bush’s head on Joe Pesce
and Abramoff’s on the other guy. Bush is blasting away with a .45 at
some hapless schmuck. Captioned;
Wash. D.C
August 23, 2003
Choctaw Casino-Card game goes sour
(You had to be there)
I get this:
ERROR
The requested URL could not be retrieved
——————————————————————————–
While trying to retrieve the URL: http://localhost:10141/blogger/8045/1753/1600/bush_abramoff2.jpg
The following error was encountered:
Access Denied.
You can cut and past the link…but it is only a joke…I was hoping for the picture…
When the facts are squarely opposed to the spin you’re trying to create about the point that is being debated*, put out lies to “balance” the facts, change the point being debated about (typically known as “moving the goalposts”), and then project your lying hypocrisy onto your opponents. Dugger of the Bloviating Deception Association is a classic example of this standard trick in the Repugnicant playbook.
This has been today’s lesson in Reich Wing Logic** 101
* - like, say, when a Publican bagman with ties to the Mob is caught red-handed bribing Publican officials.
** - or lack thereof
Good summary Tom- I will add- when confronted with facts implying a moral, ethical, or legal failing of a Republican or right-wing person, compare the action to an unrelated President Clinton action, and claim the moral high ground.
It’s the Factcheck Universal Clenis Knowledge Evasion Doctrine.