Soto:
In fact, tribal donations to Democrats went down after they retained Abramoff and amounts to the GOP went up sharply.
Would this have anything to do with one party being in the majority and the other party not? Is it some great revelation that the Republicans have more stroke these days?
Come on, Steve. You gotta have Willie Sutton explain this stuff to you?
Posted by Toby Petzold at January 27, 2006 04:35 PMWould this have anything to do with one party being in the majority and the other party not?
Thank you, li'l guy, for finally accepting the fact that this is an entirely Republican scandal. I know it was hard to believe that we are right and you are wrong, but you're well on your way to becoming almost human.
Posted by iamcoyote at January 27, 2006 04:49 PMWillie Sutton? Is that the best you can come up with? Pathetic.
Posted by ann at January 27, 2006 05:04 PMiamcoyote, you can feel superior about yourself, I guess, by believing that your party is somehow cleaner, but that's really just the conceit of the damned. "Entirely" a Republican scandal? That's what we normal human beings call a lie.
I'll believe that this shit has finally translated into greater public confidence in the Democratic Party when I see Coach Hastert hand his gavel over to Speaker Pelosi.
Posted by Toby Petzold at January 27, 2006 05:24 PMIf its true that Abramoff directed/recommended/gave/whatever some 700 odd thousand to Dems, then Dammit !!!!!, this is a LOSING issue too... and we should NOT go there because we'll be burning ourselves at the same stake as the Repugnants... Moreover, maybe we look even worse, because it will come off as so hypocritical coming from a Dem... Look what's so hard about this... in 2002 you think Gore would have been okay to say "hey elect me I never got a blowjob in the Whitehouse, all I got was a handjob..." Christ... 700 grand is alot of gland-handing from Abramoff-- directly or indirectly-- to a party that has no POWER and controls nothing , and NO WAY can a nuanced message win here... Since the Dems are not squeaky clean, DON'T GO THERE... Best we can hope for are some heavy-handed Abramoff statements about destorying Dem causes that maybe can we Can Swiftboat him with... trying a direct frontal assault on Repugnants risks fragging ourselves with the blowback....
Posted by tjschill at January 27, 2006 05:24 PMOh, my God. Politicians accepted donations from groups and people that had an interest in getting some type of legislation passed. Stop the Presses.
This has never happened in all of the history of mankind.
Abramhoff is not a scandal yet. He may be a criminal, and he may have exclusively given to Republicans, but taking money from citizens is part of our Constitution. Its part of our civil rights to give to those we want to help. Our motives need not be pure for the system to work, nor do they need to be true, for the system to fail.
Politicians can become drunk with power, whether Democratic or Republican or even Independent. Power corrupts. period.
So make a big deal about this, I have no qualms about the Republicans being run out of town if they participated in any bribery. But I dare say, that your boys and girls are not lilly white.
Rostenkowski, Jim Wright, to name but two.
Posted by carpediem at January 27, 2006 05:28 PMAbramhoff is not a scandal yet. He may be a criminal, and he may have exclusively given to Republicans, but taking money from citizens is part of our Constitution.
Abramoff is most certainly a scandal and definitely a Republican scandal. He is not a scandal for accepting money, but for tax evasion, fraud and conspiracy to bribe public officials. None of those crimes is allowed in the Constitution.
Posted by ann at January 27, 2006 05:39 PMBoy, you guys are really tools aren't you? Your talking points for the last two weeks have been that Democrats are just as guilty as Republicans in getting money from Abramoff.
Then when we prove that Abramoff didn't give any money to Democrats, you pivot to the flimsy "well, he directed his clients to give money to Democrats just the same."
Then when we show that in fact his clients gave the Democrats a fraction of what they gave to the GOP at his direction, and that the amount of money they gave the Democrats actually went down at his direction, suddenly one of you reverts to "well, of course the GOP got more money; they have been in power", which is what we were saying from Day One to prove that this was in fact a GOP/K Street Project scandal all along.
And then, totally irrelevant to Abramoff and the matter at hand, the other one of you brings up Democrats from 15 years ago who were paupers compared to what Abramoff and Norquist fleeced the tribes of.
Priceless, but totally predictable. Thanks guys for proving my suspicions correct about what you would do when the facts kept falling down on your heads.
You guys made my night; thanks.
Posted by Steve Soto at January 27, 2006 06:45 PMOn the best day the democrats ever had, they couldn't even imagine looting on the scale that repubs have perpatrated.
And Toby and crap-master continue to aid and abet.
What will they do when their soon to be discredited worldview is consigned to the big ash-heap of failure.
What will they do?
Posted by SnarkyShark at January 27, 2006 07:03 PMSenators from both parties with indian tribes in their states recieved campaign funds from home state tribes. There's nothing illegal about that. Abramoff himself was a young Republican operative and has given money only to Republicans. This is a Republican scandal. The money whose legality is in question was only given to Republicans. There is nothing bi-partisan about this scandal.
Posted by rlp at January 27, 2006 07:07 PMWell, sad to see that a difference of viewpoint is met with the slings and arrows of the militancy of your position... Suffice it to say that I do not agree that a war cry, however shrill, proves any point more convincingly than being right on that issue... It makes little sense to have a stiff backbone coupled with a flaccid mental acuity....
Posted by tjschill at January 27, 2006 07:14 PMI'd be checking tjschills IP.
Posted by idiosynchronic at January 27, 2006 07:40 PMI dunno, I just got whiplash. Who knew a flip could flop that fast?
Posted by iamcoyote at January 27, 2006 07:46 PMI've been giving you guys some top-shelf advice and what do I get in return? The insinuation that I am an amoralist.
Bah!
Posted by Toby Petzold at January 27, 2006 07:48 PMCan one of you Abramoff wonks say if this squares with Ron K, Seattle's critique?
Posted by Pacific John at January 27, 2006 07:54 PMThe big scandal is the charities scam, getting donations to charities and using most of the money as political funny money while using only 1% or less for charitable purposes.
Posted by Brian Boru at January 27, 2006 09:02 PMDon't you guys get dizzy from all the spinning you do?
I thought your talking points were that Abramoff DID NOT direct the tribesto give money to the Dems.
Just ask Dr. Dean.....heh
Posted by dipshit at January 27, 2006 09:58 PMMan..Steve will be P.O.'d at this. More of his favorite fiddle players nabbed:
Iraqi tribes in Anbar arrest 270 Arab and foreign al-Qaeda members!
From Dar al-Hayat (Arabic):
The Anbar tribes’ campaign to rid the province of Zarqawi’s terror organization, al-Qaeda in Iraq is in its 2nd day and so far, 270 Arab and foreign intruders have been arrested.
[…]
Usama Jad’aan, the leader of Karabila tribes in Qaim told al-Hayat that “the operation will continue to eliminate terror elements according to a quality plan” and added “270 Arab and foreign intruders have been arrested, in addition to some Iraqis who were providing them shelter”.
Sheikh Jad’aan added “the operation is conducted in coordination between the tribes and the minister of defense Sa’doun al-Dulaimi and since we arrested hundreds of terrorists, I don’t expect the operation to take a lot of time”.
He also stole money from tribes by commiting fraud.
Posted by Judith at January 27, 2006 10:55 PMLet's not forget that Abramoff also commited fraud, which is illegal. The following article is a good summary of who he is, and how he rose to such power and ultimately such greed. Anyone who thinks it "was business as usual" is mistakened.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/12/28/AR2005122801588.html
Posted by Judith at January 27, 2006 11:26 PMdipshit, please stop being so juvenile. You think Steve roots for Al Queda? Truly? Then WTF are you doing here consorting with terr'ist sympathizers? Idiot.
Posted by Sharon at January 28, 2006 06:04 AMAgain, Abramhoff is not a scandal YET. He has been indicted and I can imagine that the other shoe will fall soon enough.
But what you guys all seem to be wanting to be truth, is that somehow, anyone that took any money from anybody is a criminal...
Thats not the law. The constitution specifically gives us the right to give money to our congress or President period, case closed.
What is illegal of course if there was some true bribery involved.
Abramhoff most likely will be a big scandal, but the other shoe hasn't fallen yet detailing who recieved "bribes" instead of donations to a campaign.
Because if recieving campaign money is a crime, then this scandal is not a Republican scandal.
And just because Abramhoff may have bribed some scum Republicans doesn't mean all of his money was bribes. Sure it gives you great political food for fodder, but a crime by inference is not the same as a true crime.
So, have a good laugh at my comments, but re-read them again. I don't think you know what you are laughing at.
Time will tell, and I hope that EVERYONE who is guilty of these "supposed" crimes goes down, even if it is only Republicans. I hate power hungry politicians, no matter what their party.
Posted by carpediem at January 28, 2006 06:23 AMCarpe,
Your last line is the only one with which I agree wholeheartedly. Sadly, I doubt that, if (as the evidence indicates) only Republicans have dirty hands in this and will go down, it won't change your party allegiance one bit.
Of course, your vote isn't really the issue in all of this, when it comes to election day.
Posted by Jonathan at January 28, 2006 07:18 AMBut what you guys all seem to be wanting to be truth, is that somehow, anyone that took any money from anybody is a criminal...
You really can't be this ignorant.
but that's really just the conceit of the damned. "Entirely" a Republican scandal? That's what we normal human beings call a lie.
You really can be this ignorant.
Rostenkowski, Jim Wright, to name but two.
Nixon, to name an entire administration. You don't want to play this game. History speaks volumes about the kind of scum you support. Newtie, anyone? DeLay? You guys make scum look angelic.
But what you guys all seem to be wanting to be truth, is that somehow, anyone that took any money from anybody is a criminal...
How dare you tell me what I want to be the truth...How dare you speak for me (or for that matter any one else on this board) and tell me what I want or claim to know what I want. You of all people who has nothing in common with the way I think or my beliefs should never be claiming to know what I want!
ann posted the charges against Abramoff above...and one of those happens to be bribery of a public officials...so just what/who were those officials. My hunch tells me that many if not all were republicons. And right now it is only republicon public officials that are being investigated in the matter. And lastly no one here outside of idiot media folk and simpleton republicons who are using this rhetoric that clients of Abramoff who gave to public officials of both parties therefore make this a bipartisan scandal are making your claim above that I italicized.
Posted by emal at January 28, 2006 07:25 AMAnd lastly no one here outside of idiot media folk and simpleton republicons who are using this rhetoric that clients of Abramoff who gave to public officials of both parties therefore make this a bipartisan scandal are making your claim above that I italicized.
Anyone else hear the echo from the bitch-slap?
Posted by phidipides at January 28, 2006 07:41 AMDenny Hastert and Tom DeLay are "friends" of the gaming industry. Oh yeah, they go waaaaay back, baby.
Why just the other day, Denny was reminding them of who their "real" friends are:
"The speaker is dismayed and disappointed that the gaming industry continues to place their bets on the wrong team."
as long as we're talking about the "coach," hastert also figures in the sibel edmonds gag order. "coach" is believed to have accepted a bribe from the turkish gov to squash a house motion to recognize the armenian genocide. of course, that may just be a cover. but for some reason, sibel edmonds was told not to do her job.
too bad this story hasn't gotten more coverage. ms. edmonds is quite, um, telegenic.
I truly do. Take a look through the archives and find the post where he said he was happy that Al-Qaeda was playing Bush like a fiddle.
So...yep...I truly do.
Posted by dipshit at January 28, 2006 01:48 PMIs it some great revelation that the Republicans have more stroke these days? Posted by Toby PetzoldActually, the K Street project made certain that this would be an entirely Republican scandal.
Rostenkowski, Jim Wright, to name but two. Posted by carpediemIt's encouraging to see you know some history, but it has nothing to do with the likes of Dukstir Cunningham, Tom DeLay, Robert Ney, Curt Weldon, and potentially a dozen more Republicans. Of course, going by historical standards, no one did it better than the Reagan administration until now Posted by Mike at January 28, 2006 03:52 PM