Abramoff: A 'Republican' Fund Raiser?

Published on January 6, 2006 By Dr Guy In Politics

Over the past several months, we have been regaled by the incompetent mainstream media on how the impending plea bargain by Jack Abramoff was a killer issue for the republicans, since he was a republican fund raiser! Oh the shame! The dirt and scandal! How could those wascally wepublicans get away with this sleaze?

But notice it was only the MSM doing the finger pointing. Strangely, the democrat leadership has been very silent on the whole Abramoff issue! Why? Unlike the lies they spread on Bush, this should be a juicy scandal to exploit! Especially in an election year! And they love anything that even has a whiff of scandal (Bush I to Paris before the 80 election! Reasons for going into Iraq. Ted {hic} Kennedy: Lies, lies, lies).

Well, perhaps the reason they are silent, is like the third Reich at the end of the war, they are too busy burning sensitive documents! yes! For it seems that Abramoff is an equal opportunity fund raiser! 40 of the 45 members of the democrat caucus in the senate have benefited from Abramoff's ill gotten booty (or as hawkeye says, ill booten gotti). And not just chump change either!

One of the best is Harry Reid! The holier than tho caster of aspersions against anyone not a democrat. (who admits he is not the sharpest knife in the drawer!). yea, he seemed to pick up some nice pocket change after canvasing the Bureau of Indian Affairs to allow a Casino, and then pocketed 10 grand from a couple of Abramoff clients ("I never met the man! How did I know where the money came from?")

Ah, so in all honesty, many politicians from both parties reaped rewards from Abramoff, not just republicans. And the democrats want this to quietly go away as much, if not more, than the republicans. But their faithful lap dogs in the MSM, who cant get a story straight or tell the difference between an Internet rumor and actual facts, did not get the memo! So while the MSM is trying to pillory the republicans, the democrats are crossing their fingers and hoping it will go away!

Lap dogs are such great animals! Loving loyal and kind! Everyone should have one, as they look up to their masters as demi-gods! But they are also too stupid to know when the master is trying to shush them!

Oh the irony! We shall see what comes out now that a plea deal has been reached. I wonder if any more of Chuckie Cheeses (sorry, Schumer's) staffers are going to fall on the sword on this one!

Bets anyone?

Comments (Page 3)

davad70

on Jan 09, 2006

Ted...

What that article doesn't tell you is whether those contributions came from Abramoff personally or his clients. If you dig a little deeper you find that all that money was from clients, not from him personally...just as KB stated.

ParaTed2k

on Jan 09, 2006

So what is the difference between a Republican accepting money through seregates or a Democrat? Many of these people have already paid fines for their acceptance of money, so don't bore me with attempts to excuse their action.

Anyone who tries to spin this as a problem in only 1 party is merely proving that they are willing to allow any amount of criminality from their own side.

drmiler

on Jan 09, 2006

When and if" the col takes this advise, the comments to him will more than likely die down!

first of all, what gives you the right to decide who deserves to be treated with a total lack of respect?

i were you, i'd consider moving outta my own glass doublewide before i resumed tossing stones.

your use of those damned *s to indicate emphasis have annoyed me for a long while. how about i start referring to you from now on as dr*miler* and then maybe continue in that direction and go for somethin like dr asstricks?

when and if you stop using them (and quit quoting the entire text of every post upon which you feel the need to comment), perhaps i'd let it go.

Personally I don't give a rat's butt if you let it go or not. That's your problem! And I alone did not deem the col worthy of nothing but scorn. Most of that he brought down on his own neck. Just look around, you will find the left starting to say the same things about him. Anyway you look at it you can take it anyway you want. I personally do NOT get into the heavy name calling on the col. Usually the worst he gets from me is "col klink". All I did was point out that "if" he stopped being a one trick pony, that people would most likely start laying off him. If you can't handle that then too bad!

Dr Guy

on Jan 09, 2006

Here is a list of congressmen who have been implicated in the scandal:

You apparently dont know how to read. These were not "implicated". They got money from Abramoff. Some may be implicated. We will find out soon enough. However, your list is woefully short as my link has already demonstrated. Nice selective editing. I guess you do work for the MSM, you report as well as they do.

Dr Guy

on Jan 09, 2006

Nothing except for the fact it's "BOTH" sides of the fence!

And it is far from accurate as the list on the link I published clearly shows. My point was not that this is a Democrat scandal, and indeed I think I made that point. My point is that it is a scandal that is going to burn both sides, yet the MSM plays it as a republican scandal. Again, they do not have the ehtics or intelligence to accurately report the news. Instead they are trying to make it.

Dr Guy

on Jan 09, 2006

Nobody sat down and planned a majority for either party, the voters had their say and the majority and minority parties took their places based on that say.

For you to sit and whine about the outcome is proof that, not only are you clueless to the way our system of government works, you aren't mature enough to be able to handle your own freedom.

In his zeal, he would throw out the baby with the bathwater and install a 'benevolent' dictatorship. That would then turn out to be worse. Sometimes I wonder if he has any non-hate grey cells left.

Dr Guy

on Jan 09, 2006

you do realize why delay was indicted? if not, lemme refresh your memory. he allegedly funneled money donated by non-residents of texas to give an edge to republican candidates running for both state and national office.

That was a very good statement kb. Now, when he is exonerated, will you be the first on the block to state that "he was a victim of a partisan witch hunt"?

Dr Guy

on Jan 09, 2006

while i may not agree with col gene, the colon bin laden gangrene thing has become something which, even if it doesn't violate the tos (as i believe it might; if not, it should) diminishes the quality of the ju experience. it's mean, disrespectful and, worst of all, totally devoid at this point--actually that happened about the third or fourth instance--of whatever sophomoric amusement it once evoked.

Point of order. I dont think the comments section violate the TOS about name calling, unless you are advocating physical harm to another. So you can call anyone anything there, just not in the articles that go into the forums themselves.

Dr Guy

on Jan 09, 2006

I was talking about the last five years of the Bush Administration as NOT WORKING for the vast majority of Americans.

Facts would dictate you are completely wrong, and off your rocker. If you gave up your hate, perhaps you could then start posting some intelligent comments and articles again.

Dr Guy

on Jan 09, 2006

It also still reminds them that they work for the people of their district and their states... even if they seem to resent the fact.

The role of the citizen legislator died with the 20th century unfortunately.

Dr Guy

on Jan 09, 2006

And just an FYI "if" it were "really" against TOS don't you think one of the admin's would have said something by now?

An easy way is to read the TOU. And I think it is clear that as long as you are not advocating physical abuse of another Joe User, the comments are ok.

Dr Guy

on Jan 09, 2006

in all honesty, how many democrats received one cent of the $204,235.00 abramoff admits to have personally donated to politicians?

please just answer that question. none of the usual evasive obtuse spin, please.

Several comments before this one, you correctly identified why Delay was indicted. Then you use this slimy slip? Gee! Why was Duke Cunningham nailed? Just because some of the money was in my pocket before yours, and some was in my clients, does not make it any less unethical or ethical!

So I turn it around to you again. How much of the money that Abramoff directed went into whose pockets?

Dr Guy

on Jan 09, 2006

when and if you stop using them (and quit quoting the entire text of every post upon which you feel the need to comment), perhaps i'd let it go.

Seems you are the one obsessed. Why should his comments irk you so? Why cant you let them go?

Dr Guy

on Jan 09, 2006

Reply By: ParaTed2k

Seems they forgot the intent of the article again.

Dr Guy

on Jan 09, 2006

What that article doesn't tell you is whether those contributions came from Abramoff personally or his clients. If you dig a little deeper you find that all that money was from clients, not from him personally...just as KB stated.

And the lying troll is wrong again. Why do you keep coming around when you said you would not?

Now, you want to post a link to your mis-statement? How about when Harry Reid got his $10 grand from the Indians after arm twisting on the Casino issue? That looks mighty white to me! NOT!

Welcome Guest! Please take the time to register with us.
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:

Richer content, access to many features that are disabled for guests like commenting on the forums.
Access to a great community, with a massive database of many, many areas of interest.
Access to contests & subscription offers like exclusive emails.
It's simple, and FREE!