Lying editorial tries to tie Dems to Abramoff (including Kerry)

[MH1]

Worthy dailykos diary explains it:
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2006/2/19/20152/9361

with info on the true story and how to write to the paper.

Note the repukes are claiming JK got a huge sum "from Abramoff" or, as the National Republican Senatorial Committee puts it "Abramoff-related sources" - i.e. clients who also donated to Abramoff, I guess. So I thought folks here might be interested.

[ProSense]

1. They are in real trouble, including Bush, and trying to deflect

They been trying to push that story for some time now. It's another one of those Democrats did it too stories:

December 8, 2005

NRSC plans multi-state attack tying Democrats to Abramoff
By Peter Savodnik

The National Republican Senatorial Committee (NRSC) is planning a public-relations offensive tying leading Democrats to lobbyist Jack Abramoff in an effort to neutralize accusations that

more...

http://www.thehill.com/thehill/export/TheHill/News/Campaign/120805_abramoff.html

Democrats also got tribal donations
Abramoff issue may affect both political parties

By Jeffrey H. Birnbaum and Derek Willis
The Washington Post
Updated: 11:47 p.m. ET June 2, 2005

Lobbyist Jack Abramoff and an associate famously collected $82 million in lobbying and public relations fees from six Indian tribes and devoted a lot of their time to trying to persuade Republican lawmakers to act on their clients' behalf.

But Abramoff didn't work just with Republicans. He oversaw a team of two dozen lobbyists at the law firm Greenberg Traurig that included many Democrats. Moreover, the campaign contributions that Abramoff directed from the tribes went to Democratic as well as Republican legislators.

more...

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/8079308/

The Democrats and the DSCC has been hitting them hard in MT.

Mont. Democrats get help criticizing Burns
By Sarah Cooke, Associated Press Writer | August 8, 2005

HELENA, Mont. --The Montana Democratic Party -- aided by the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee -- is airing a television ad criticizing Republican Sen. Conrad Burns for his dealings with a GOP lobbyist who is under federal investigation.

http://www.boston.com/news/nation/washington/articles/2005/08/08/mont_democrats_get_help_criticizing_burns/

Also see this:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=2469348&mesg_id=2469348

[TayTay]

2. This is ridiculous

This is like saying that someone got mugged and you are evil because the person who got mugged once gave you money. The Indian Tribes were Abramoff's victims. They were defrauded of their money and that money may have been used to fund Republican candidates and causes. There may be a 'quid pro quo' system in place wherein Repubs were bribed (ala Duke Cunningham) to change votes because of the money and the way Abramoff spread it around.

There is no quid pro quo for Democrats. It doesn't exist. (And this is a bad syllogism anyway.)

[sandnsea]

3. The rural paper point is good though

We don't spend enough time targting them, alot of them may as well have been written by Limbaugh himself. Wish I could say I was surprised at the editorial, but I'm not. I figured they'd manage to turn it into a Dem scandal in upside-down world.

[TayTay]

4. We do need to pay attention to that.

We also need to start telling small town and rural America just how much they are being screwed over by their buddies the Rethugs. The children of a lot of these small towns are leaving and heading toward the big cities. The farm subsidies are in the cross-hairs of the Bush Admin budget cutters because they don't believe in subsidies and, if they decide to fund farming and food subsidies they will do it with Big Agrecultural firms and cut out the small farmers alltogether.

We need to talk about that. The policies of this Admin have been devastating to rural America. Maybe that is why the Bush Admin's approval rating is down to 39%. Imagine what the approval rating would be if the media was actually fair and truthful and committed to getting real news out. Imagine A Katrina-type response on everything these criminal bastards have done?

[sandnsea]

6. Classified Ads

They can cover several states for a few hundred dollars, with issues or a campaign type message. Farming is always an issue, but so is health care and SBA loan and other small business stuff. Lots of people worry about the environment too, the damage is right in front of their eyes.

Anyway, how'd you come through the storm?? I thought about you up there, buried in all that snow. If it makes you feel any better, we've been freezing here too. Hope it's just a cold snap and everybody goes back to warmer days soon.

[TayTay]

9. The snow is all gone

The weather has been wacky as hell this winter. Overall, it's been mild, with a few patches of cold weather. The big snow from last weekend is all gone. After the nor'easter we had a few days of temps in the 40-50 degree range and the snow all melted. Then it got kind of cold. (20's during the day with some wind and 10's or below at night.) Weird winter overall.

And I agree about the issues for rural areas. A lot of hunters are environmentalists, they want the land preserved for future generations and to ensure that the wild game survives. Sigh!

[JI7]

5. the media does all they can trying to make this a bipartisan thing

and then they ask with their disgusting faces "if Bush is doing so bad why can't Democrats benefit" ?

[ProSense]

7. Exactly! And whenever

the media points to Republican corruption, it's only to demonstrate Democratic ineffectiveness:

There are plenty of good reasons for thinking 2006 could become another 1994. In a remarkably short period, today's Republican establishment has lumbered itself with exactly the same problems as yesterday's Democratic establishment - and then some. The Republican Party may not be quite as lethargic as the Democrats were, but it is undoubtedly more corrupt and probably more schizophrenic about policy - first over-reaching with tax cuts and then retreating into tinkering.

Polls show the Republicans are increasingly toxic to voters (they trail their rivals by a stable eight points in generic congressional battles), but they are just as complacent as the Democrats were in 1994 - convinced they have jobs for life as long as they are not caught in bed with the proverbial dead girl or live boy.

The Democrats are doing their best to exploit this. Ever since Jack Abramoff, a conservative uberlobbyist, pleaded guilty to corruption charges in January, they have hammered away at the "culture of corruption" and tried to show how Washington sleaze hurts ordinary people, forcing them to pay more for energy or spend hours trying to get needlessly complicated drug prescriptions. (Their best line so far: "The poison tree of corruption" is producing the "fruits of bad legislation.") But two big differences separate the Republican class of 1994 and the Democratic class of 2006, differences that could well reduce a regime-changing earthquake into a mild tremor.

Posted in this thread (the article in the OP is another example):

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=2467543&mesg_id=2467543

[rox63]

8. Prior to being involved with Abramoff

The majority of the Indian tribes' political donations went to Dems. Their dealings with Abramoff siphoned a lot of that money away to rethugs. So they were actually giving less to Dems because of Abramoff.