Posts filed under 'Corruption'
Grand Old Partisan remembers Oliver Morton, a Civil War-era GOPer:
During the Civil War, Governor Morton blocked a Democrat ploy to withdraw the state militia from the U.S. Army by having Republican legislators walk out, preventing a quorum. For the next two years, he funded the state government with contributions from Republican counties and the War Department. When Secretary Stanton told him that the War Department’s (illegal) financial support for the state of Indiana would open Governor Morton to prosecution should the U.S. Government lose the Civil War, Morton replied: “If we lose this war, I do not wish to live.”
A few years later, as a U.S Senator, Oliver Morton had this to say: “Every one who shoots down negroes in the streets, burns negro school-houses and meeting-houses, and murders women and children by the light of their own flaming dwellings, calls himself a Democrat. Every New York rioter in 1863 who burned up little children in colored asylums, who robbed, ravished, and murdered indiscriminately in the midst of a blazing city for three days and nights, calls himself a Democrat. In short, the Democratic Party may be described as a common sewer and loathsome receptacle into which is emptied every element of treason, North and South, every element of inhumanity and barbarism which has dishonored the age.”
Strong stuff, but when the truth needs to be told, then one should tell it - and back in those days, what Morton was saying was 100% true. I bring this up for two reasons:
1. To add yet more proof of the GOP’s ancient concern for the rights of African-Americans.
2. To demonstrate that some times we must speak boldly - that when someone is doing something really horrific, we should be horrified and tell everyone how we view the issue. To hide behind mealy-mouthed words in the service of false amity is to play the part of a coward.
It is true that we must work for peace and for the calm settlements of our differences - but when one side continually usurps the rights of the people, continually protects their corrupt members and continually undermines the war effort in the service of partisan goals, then we are justly outraged, and we should say so. We have allowed, in the name of national unity, the Democrats to have too free a time with their partisan, hate-filled and corrupt attacks. Part of this stemmed from an admirable impulse on the part of President Bush (as well as John McCain, and others) to honestly work with Democrats for the public good, but another part of it stems from a fear of censure. Too many GOPers fear to be called divisive…and the absurd part of this is twofold: we’re going to be called divisive any time we disagree, and we’re being called divisive by those who feed on the divisions in our society.
What we must do is stand up and make our voices heard - remembering that while we may lose even so, at least we’ll at least lose honorably after putting up a strong fight.
August 4th, 2008
All data from Open Secrets:
What happened to Sidley Austin LLP? Employees (almost all attorneys) donated $189,832 from 3/17/07 to 5/30/08. Since then, nothing. Perhaps, though, they had just maxed out?
What about Samir G. of Sidley Austin LLP? He donated 8 times to Obama. All on March 26th, 2008. Totalling $2,600.00. And then there’s the other oddity – on the same date, Obama sent back to G. $1,400.00.
He also donated 5 times on March 25th, 2008. That day he got back $200.00, so his net to Obama was $1,700.00. Between March 25th and 26th, that works out to $2,900.00. Couldn’t he have just written one check for that amount? Kind of a hassle to donate 13 times in two days, isn’t it? Was his leg tingling more intensely the more he gave? Is donating to Obama kinda like smoking crack? Or did he just forget that he’d already donated that day?
Lawrence K. of Sidley Austin LLP was also a generous donor – donating 8 times totaling $5,050.00. But don’t worry about any campaign finance violations here – I don’t think you’re allowed to give that much to a candidate, but as Obama sent back $1,250.00, we’re golden.
James D. of Sidley Austin LLP was a bit less generous – donating 6 times for a total of $2,800.00. Obama sent him back $500.00. But to make up for this lack of audacious hope on the part of Mr. D. there is Mrs D., who donated 6 times for a total of $2,700.00. Obama sent her back $200.00. That works out to $4,800.00 from the Ds.
Anyone besides me find anything odd about the employees of a Chicago law firm recently forced to shell out $27.5 million in an EEOC case being so wierdly generous with a Chicago politician who may be the next President of the United States?
Tags: Barack Obama
July 27th, 2008
Perhaps the Democrats are worried they don’t have enough voters for November?
E-Verify (the effective program to keep illegal aliens out of U.S. jobs) now is facing danger in the Senate, as well as the House.
The NumbersUSA Capitol Hill Team has been told that Sen. Menendez (D-N.J.) has put a “hold” on legislation to reauthorize the E-Verify workplace verification program. That means the Senate is barred from voting to keep it alive. Without a vote, E-Verify will die in November.
Our understanding is that Sen. Menendez is blocking the most effective tool against illegal immigration in order to get something else that he wants. He will allow an E-Verify vote if he is allowed to give hundreds of thousands of skilled American jobs permanently to hundreds of thousands of additional immigrants.
At a time when skilled Americans and students aspiring to those jobs are finding a depressed job market, Sen. Menendez is insisting on flooding their occupations with even more foreign workers. And if he doesn’t get his way, he will take away the best tool that employers have to keep illegal foreign workers from taking jobs at every rung of the ladder, but especially at the lower-skilled job level.
Our liberals have it that they are the selfless defenders of the Little Guy against Big Corporation but what they fail to understand is that Big Corporation is in many ways just like Big Government. Human life is properly lived at human-scale - smaller communties of people who know each other; bound to a larger community through ties of nationality and affection, but fundamentally looking after their own affairs through family, church and social group. We see in this action by Menedez what happens when people become mere cogs in a socio-economic machine. Menedez wants more guest-workers to please part of his constituency and thus is blocking the enforcement of a law which prevents the ruthless exploitation of illegal immigrants as well as protects the wage levels of legal residents - a lot of people are happy with Menedez’ action: people who are de-facto advocates for illegal immigration, large corporations looking for maximised profits, the national Democratic party which wants hispanic support. Who isn’t happy? The guy trying to have a stay-at-home wife to raise his three children but can’t do it because wage levels are depressed due to the importation of cheap labor. The small business trying to do the right thing by the community but being forced out by his competitors who exploit cheap, illegal labor. The local community suddenly burdened with an influx of people who don’t speak the language, are prey to gangsters, have no insurance (health, auto, life, home) and who use emergency rooms as their primary health care providers. And, of course, the illegals, themselves, who’s skills are not being used to build up their homeland but which are being used to provide a slightly higher corporate profit and a little extra political clout in the United States.
Here, also, we see the arrogance of liberalism - an arrogance bred of the conviction, largely correct, that no one will ever call a liberal to account. Any Republican who points this out? He’ll be called a racist and the MSM will go along with the accusation. Will the people of New Jersey force him out? The people of New Jersey elected him in the first place even though he had ethical troubles going in. Will his fellow Senate Democrats call him to account? The same Democrats who gave William “Cold Cash” Jefferson (D-LA) a standing ovation? Yeah, right.
Tags: E-Verify, illegal immigration, New Jersey, Senator Menedez
July 27th, 2008
Geesh - all hail the Great Guiding Light Barack Obama, our Leader and Teacher….’cause if you don’t, you’re out…
Wisconsin Democrats have ousted a delegate to their national convention for saying she would vote for Republican Sen. John McCain.
The Wisconsin Democratic Party’s administrative committee voted Friday to strip Debra Bartoshevich of her status as a delegate to the Denver convention.
Bartoshevich was elected as a pledged delegate for Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton. But after Clinton dropped out of the race, Bartoshevich told the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel she would support McCain.
Bartoshevich says she made the comments during an emotional time and she hasn’t made up her mind.
But the party says she violated rules requiring delegates to support its nominee.
Don’t try to convince her to support you, just force her out so that you can have complete unanimity, because we know how leftists hate deviationists and other Trotskyite wreckers. In our great task of defeating the forces of McCainite counter-revolution, there can be no room for those who are weak - to the wall with such traitors to the proletariat!
Tags: Barack Obama, Democratic Convention, John McCain
July 26th, 2008
Courtesy of the Democrats:
Congress has relaxed rules that would have required public disclosure of contributions and parties paid for by lobbyists, narrowing the scope of new ethics rules intended to draw back the veil on Washington’s influence game.
New guidance released by Congress late Wednesday exempts lobbyists from reporting their financing of an array of political and charitable contributions, events and parties at political conventions.
What? You expected something different? If you did, its because you still haven’t purchased Caucus of Corruption.
I know, I know - you liberals out there think Matt and I just wrote a book blaming corruption on Democrats, but that isn’t what we wrote at all. What we wrote is a book detailing how the Democrats are locked into corruption because no one ever holds them accountable - not the MSM, not rank-and-file Democrats and most certainly not other elected Democrats. People are people, and that means that a certain percentage of them will sin - and for a politician, the sin usually revolves around abuse of power by various means. We can’t get all corruption out of politics because we can’t get all people out of it. But we can lessen it greatly if we hold everyone accountable for their actions. By one means or another, Republicans are held accountable…so Cunningham goes to jail, while Jefferson is set to be re-elected, again. So Foley resigns, while Frank is a powerful member of the Democratic caucus. So Rowland is threatened with impeachment by his fellow GOPers to force him out, while Blagojevich is still in office even though he figures prominently in myriad corruption scandals. On and on it goes like that.
Look, Democrats, its not for us to tell you what you must do, but we will tell you what you should do - and what you should do is start to understand that good intentions don’t excuse crimes. It doesn’t matter that these are all good liberals who are reliably on your side on the issues - they are poisoning our politics and contributing to the contempt government is held in. They have to go - but only you, on your side, can actually make them go. Do you really want to be a party which is ok with corruption? Don’t you want to be honest as you can be?
Tags: Caucus of Corruption, liberal lies, lobbyists
July 19th, 2008
From NRO’s The Campaign Spot:
From the Chicago Sun-Times article on grants distributed by then-state-legislator Barack Obama.
(Records from 1997 to 2000 weren’t available.)
There’s a shock.
His state legislative office records may have been thrown out, he told us.
He’s never released a specific list of law clients, instead giving a list of all of his firm’s clients, numbering several hundred each year. His campaign will only confirm representation when the media comes to them with a specific case.
He won’t release his application to the state bar. He’s never released any legal or billing records to verify that he only did a few hours of work for a nonprofit tied to Tony Rezko.
He’s never released any medical records, just a one-page letter from his doctor.
Does it bother anyone that a guy with political ambitions for his entire adult life has not left a paper trail?
It does bother me…what is Obama hiding? The “Un-Named Democrat” made flesh, that is what he is - the problem is that we don’t need an International Man of Mystery as President of the United States…especially one connected with racists, anti-Americans, corrupt wheeler-dealers and the odd terrorist or two.
Tags: Barack Obama, liberal lies
July 18th, 2008
Geesh:
Today, Obama Told CNN He Supports The Death Penalty For Osama Bin Laden:
In A CNN Interview, Obama Says He Supports The Death Penalty For Osama Bin Laden. “In an interview with CNN, the Senator says he’s no ‘cheerleader for the death penalty,’ but ‘I think plotting and engineering the death of 3,000 Americans justifies such an approach.’” (Mark Halperin, “Obama: Death Penalty For Bin Laden,” Time’s “The Page” Blog, thepage.time.com, 7/11/08)
In June, Obama Said That If Bin Laden Were Captured, He Would Not Make Him A “Martyr“:
Obama: “I think what would be important would be for us to deal with him in a way that allows the entire world to understand the murderous acts that he’s engaged in and not to make him into a martyr.” (Caren Bohan, “Obama: U.S. Should Avoid Making Bin Laden A Martyr,” Reuters, 6/18/08)
Its getting harder and harder to find a position Obama hasn’t betrayed yet. This is the guy the left wants as President? A man who can’t hold to a position for even a month? What happens, dear lefties, when its time to push that universal health care plan and he runs up against GOP opposition? Has he given you any indication that he won’t surrender?
Tags: Barack Obama, bin Laden, Death Penalty, John McCain, Obama Deceptions
July 13th, 2008
So says this Newsmax report:
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi has dropped a bombshell by reversing course and suggesting that the Judiciary Committee might take up the issue of impeaching President Bush.
Pelosi’s change of heart comes after Rep. Dennis Kucinich moved a “privileged resolution” to force the House to consider whether Bush should be impeached for, according to the Ohio Democrat, lying to Congress and the American people about the reasons for invading Iraq.
Pelosi had previously declared impeachment to be “off the table” before the 2006 election. But she now believes hearings on the impeachment issue are “a distinct possibility,” according to The Nation magazine.
Pelosi told reporters on Thursday: “My expectation is that there will be some review of that in the committee. This is a Judiciary Committee matter, and I believe we will see some attention being paid to it by the Judiciary Committee.”
Rep. John Conyers, the Michigan Democrat who chairs the committee, has said he is reviewing the articles of impeachment Kucinich has proposed. Previously he had felt constrained by the Speaker’s “off the table” comment.
This is either a sop to the kook left - a means of keeping them occupied by smoke and mirrors (they are rather gullible, after all) while Obama shifts right for the fall election…or its a desperate attempt to make people hate President Bush enough to carry Obama over the finish line in November (this would be the case if internal Democratic polling shows that only a tremendously and continuously unpopular Bush gives Obama an edge over McCain). In either case, its a dishonorable thing to do…and, of course, real hearings will never happen, nor will articles of impeachment be passed by the House, because a trial in the Senate would expose that each and every criticism of President Bush vis a vis Iraq is massively overstated, at best, or an outright lie, at worst. The last thing Democrats want is a full airing of the Iraq issue prior to the November election.
Tags: Defeaticrats, Dennis Kucinich, impeachment, Iraq, John Conyers, John McCain, Nancy Pelosi
July 12th, 2008
Seems to be more and more the case that while Obama will outspend McCain, the overall battle between Democrat and Republican will be more equal:
Republican presidential candidate John McCain raised more than $22 million in June, his best fundraising performance of the year, and ended the month with nearly $27 million cash on hand.
Campaign manager Rick Davis said Thursday that McCain and the national Republican Party together entered July with about $95 million in the bank. The Republican National Committee, which has been raising money jointly with McCain, collected nearly $26 million in June and had nearly $69 million on hand, officials said.
The campaign’s fundraising has given McCain the ability to spend more on television advertising than Democrat Barack Obama in key battleground states. Davis said about half of its income had been spent on television advertising.
Obama has not revealed his June fundraising.
In announcing McCain’s fundraising, Davis portrayed the campaign’s financial position as far brighter than ever before. He said the joint RNC-McCain fundraising through direct mail is now exceeding President Bush’s direct mail fundraising in 2004.
“We will have significant resources to prosecute a campaign that is very robust,” Davis said.
I wonder why Obama hasn’t released his June totals yet? I guess he doesn’t have to - but you’d think that if he were greatly outpacing McCain, he’d want to trumpet that…hey, just askin’….
The really crucial thing here for the GOP is the $69 million the RNC has - McCain is taking public financing, so all the money McCain raises must be spent by the end of August. That $69 million (which is likely to rise) will be used on party efforts to help McCain - and down-ballot GOPers (where we are trying to turn expected losses at least into holding our own). Meanwhile, the DNC is effectively broke, the Democrats can’t raise enough to pay for their convention and while the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee has a good sized bank account, it seems that Obama is sucking up all the rest of leftwing money, which opens the question about how down-ballot Democrats will fare even if Obama wins.
Things like the money totals; the continued ability of the military to secure recruits; the ability of President Bush to win on FISA and on war funding; the abysmal Congressional approval ratings….all fo this indicates that while Obama is still the favorite to win in November, he’s only marginally so and, meanwhile, the overall left - and the Democratic party - can’t figure itself a shoo-in (though, of course, they do believe that…and I hope they keep on believing they’ve got it in the bag).
My view is that the American people are worn out - tired out Iraq, true (but not so tired they are willing to lose in order to get out), but also tired of Congressional scandals (and, Donks, William Jefferson - you forced him to resign, yet?), tired of political back-biting, tired of heated rhetoric on energy while gas prices continue to rise, tired of shrinking home equity…change is, indeed, wanted and that is the whole point of Obama…but if specific change is proposed, which way will the electorate go? McCain is offering concrete proposals, while Obama keeps things as vague as he can. Which will actually resonate come November?
Tags: Barack Obama, Defeaticrats, fundrasing, John McCain, oil price, RNC
July 11th, 2008
Never heard of the guy or the website before this evening, but here’s a website encouraging Obama delegates to ditch him over his policy shifts since wrapping up the nomination:
Richard Nixon famously said: When you are seeking the nomination for president of the Republican Party, you run to the far right; once you’ve secured the nomination, you run to right of center during the election campaign; once you’ve won the presidency, you govern from the center.
Barack Obama has embraced The Nixon Strategy lock, stock and barrel, adapting its mirror-opposite to the Left. He suckered the hard-working base of the party — the Left-wing — into voting for him during the primaries by appealing to the issues dearest to their hearts. These are the very people responsible for getting him to where he is today! Yet once Obama felt he secured the nomination, he has tripped over himself running to the center (some would argue the center-right). Oh, Barack, we thought we knew ye!
How wrong we were.
But Obama made a mistake; he started his move rightwards before securing the nomination. And what he didn’t realize was that…
What the Left giveth, the Left can taketh away!
Question: For you leftwing supporters of Obama, is the desire to beat Bush via McCain worth putting someone as ambitious and dishonest as Obama into the White House?
Tags: Barack Obama, Democratic Convention, John McCain
July 7th, 2008
Newer Posts
Older Posts
