« VIDEO: DFL STATE SENATOR ATTACKS MCCAIN’S SUPPORT FOR GAS-TAX HOLIDAY, CAN’T ANSWER QUESTION ABOUT OBAMA’S PLAN | Home | WANTED: REPUBLICAN NATIONAL CONVENTION VOLUNTEERS #2 »
JACOBS ON LIBERAL BLOG “GREEN SCREEN” ATTACK OVER COLEMAN AD: “IT WAS A FALSE CHARGE”; STILL NO APOLOGIES FROM LIBERAL BLOGS
By Michael B. Brodkorb | June 24, 2008
WCCO reported on the false attack from the liberal blogosphere over Mrs. Coleman’s appearance in a TV ad for Senator Coleman’s campaign.
Professor Larry Jacobs of the Humphrey Institute called the liberal blogosphere’s attack that Mrs. Coleman was green screened into the ad “a false charge..”:
“The blogs were wrong that Laurie Coleman was not in this ad. She was in the ad. It was a false charge…” Source: Larry Jacobs, WCCO, June 24, 2008
None of the blogs have posted apologies or admitted they were wrong. MN Publius was the first and only blog to accept reality about the ad. Not even the blogger who flat-out said that Mrs. Coleman was embedded in the TV ad has apologized or admitted they were wrong:
“…but when a Republican candidate for re-election green-screens his wife into an ad…†Source: MN Campaign Report, June 19, 2008
One would think that after being told on TV that your “reporting” was wrong and your accusations were false, that some of these liberal bloggers would apologize and admit their mistakes.
Topics: Uncategorized | 80 Comments »
80 Responses to “JACOBS ON LIBERAL BLOG “GREEN SCREEN” ATTACK OVER COLEMAN AD: “IT WAS A FALSE CHARGE”; STILL NO APOLOGIES FROM LIBERAL BLOGS”
Comments
You must be logged in to post a comment.
June 24th, 2008 at 10:23 am
I guess this is what the goofy blogger community is all about:
1) talking crazy talk
2) never taking responsibility for it
Maybe it’s an illness…
June 24th, 2008 at 10:25 am
One would think that Norm Coleman and/or Laurie Coleman would personally say that they were both in the room for the shooting of the ad.
The fact that they relegated the response to a campaign flunkee shows to me that they are not willing to be caught in the lie personally.
Why won’t the Colemans step up and say that they were in the same room when the ad was shot?
June 24th, 2008 at 10:27 am
Leroy: Outtakes from the commercial were released. Senator Coleman and his wife were both in the kitchen at the exact same time the ad was shot. The record is clear.
June 24th, 2008 at 10:43 am
Hey, here’s another job that Al Franken is unqualified for: Comedy writer
http://minneapolis.craigslist.org/wri/699815848.html
LOL!
June 24th, 2008 at 10:51 am
I’m going to follow Leroy’s example and just post wild accusations, then demand that the accused prove me wrong:
1) Paul Wellstone was piloting the plane when it crashed.
2) Larry Pogemiller is a transvestite.
3) TwoPuttTommy and Leroy got married last week in California.
4) Al Franken once failed to pay workers comp. in New York, then blamed the doorman who didn’t sign his name to the certified mail as the reason why he didn’t know about it, then paid a $25,000 fine, then he was found to have lied about doing business in California, then he was found to have not paid his taxes in 17 states, then he denied not paid the taxes, then he blamed his accountant and produced a phony document, then he promised to pay all the fines and all the back taxes, then Al Franken’s signature appeared on documents used to rob a children’s charity of nearly a million dollars as part of the Air America scam, then Al Franken was a hate-mongering radio host who’s show failed miserably…
Oh wait… that fourth one is absolutely true!!!
June 24th, 2008 at 10:54 am
… I’m still waiting for documented proof that the first three aren’t true. And the absence of documentation is not proof. I demand proof!!!!
June 24th, 2008 at 10:55 am
So, if Norm and Laurie were both in the room, all they need to do is come out and say it. It isn’t all that hard. A statement from Norm Coleman saying he was in the same room as his wife when the ad was shot would put this all to bed (or catch him in a lie).
He issues statements every day about trivial things in the campaign. Why is he afraid to issue one in this case?
And when you are accused of video trickery, responding with a video is a weak defense.
June 24th, 2008 at 11:00 am
Chestnut-
I did not marry TwoPutt Tommy, (nor anyone else), in California (or any other state) last week,(or at any other time).
-Leroy Jenkins
(See, I came out and said it. It is not like I am demanding all the raw video. I just want Norm on the record saying the ad occurred the way his people claim it did).
June 24th, 2008 at 11:11 am
I’m not buying it. When you’re accused of lame comment accusations, responding with a lame comment on a blog is a pretty weak defense.
Why send a flunky to type your name in the Name box? Why not buy ad space on KARE-11 News to deny the accusations?
Bullshit Leroy. I mean, Mrs. Tommy.
June 24th, 2008 at 11:17 am
Here’s another wild claim:
Leroy Jenkins is related to Benito Mussolini (explains where he gets is dominant fascism trait).
The only way for Leroy to prove that he wasn’t in California getting married to Tommy last week is to produce 168 hours of surveilance video showing either him or Tommy in separate locations and not in California through the entirety of last week.
Anything short of that full video-taped disclosure, does not prove that he was not in California last week getting married to Tommy.
June 24th, 2008 at 11:17 am
Leroy Jenkins said:
“So, if Norm and Laurie were both in the room, all they need to do is come out and say it”
Really? It’s that easy? Or would some goofy blogger type call them liars, again without a shred of evidence, and then say something stupid like:
“Since when does the person making the allegation have to prove ANYTHING?”
I know it sounds far fetched, but it could happen.
“He issues statements every day about trivial things in the campaign.”
In your august opinion. *snicker*
“Why is he afraid to issue one in this case?”
Some things, Leroy Jenkins, are too trivial (and stupid) to bring to the attention of others. This “Green Screen” thing would be one of them.
June 24th, 2008 at 11:21 am
Do you guys really want to make an issue of this? The problem with the original ad was that it directed attention at something that it really wasn’t in the interest of the campaign to emphasize. By pushing for an apology, Republican bloggers are pushing the discussion in a direction a lot of us would prefer to avoid.
Let’s keep this campaign focussed on the issues, not the personal foibles of the candidates.
June 24th, 2008 at 11:35 am
“So, if Norm and Laurie were both in the room, all they need to do is come out and say it. It isn’t all that hard. A statement from Norm Coleman saying he was in the same room as his wife when the ad was shot would put this all to bed (or catch him in a lie).
…
And when you are accused of video trickery, responding with a video is a weak defense.”
Oh really?
“Where is the B-Roll, Michael?
I swear you promised to provide evidence that this happened. So far, all we have is a growing controversy, and Norm’s reputation taking a hit.
I would think it would be easy to provide b-roll showing the two of them together when the commercial was being shot.
Or are you and Norm lying?”
Sound familiar Leroy? It should, since YOU WROTE IT FOUR FREAKING DAYS AGO BEFORE YOU WERE FORCED TO CHANGE YOUR TUNE.
As for the rest of the idiot chorus, they were right there with you.
“Leroy, they could have put an end to this story with a couple of outtakes. They haven’t. The implication is obvious.” – TommyJohnson
“I agree, there needs to be higher quality video proving this. A statement by itself is not proof.” – Eva Young
“And Eva is correct; a statement by itself is not proof.” – TommyJohnson
“asd;fkahfa[whfaojgnambna’awera’!!!!!” – el presidente
Do you guys realize how boringly predictable you are?
June 24th, 2008 at 11:46 am
I asked for b-roll. Not a 8 second clip on the producer’s website. Since that is all they have to refute the claims, I am simply asking Norm to say that the charges are false, and that he was in the room with his wife when the ad was shot.
The fact that he won’t is the leading cause of my suspicion toward the ad.
June 24th, 2008 at 11:50 am
O.k. Mrs. TwoPuttTommy.
June 24th, 2008 at 11:50 am
… and actually, I’m going to bet it’s your paranoid delusions and undiagnosed schizophrenia that are the leading causes of your suspicions.
June 24th, 2008 at 11:59 am
Michael, you said a few days ago that the Franken campaign was pushing this issue. Please provide proof of this or apologize.
June 24th, 2008 at 12:01 pm
CE, you dumb, lying, fascist bizatch, he said Franken supporters, not the campaign.
June 24th, 2008 at 12:05 pm
CE: I don’t discuss my methods of sources, but I know that Team Franken and their supporters were pushing this story.
June 24th, 2008 at 12:10 pm
I’m amazed at the immaturity and childishness of so many of these liberal bloggers. The impulsive and childish assumption that Mrs. Coleman was added later to her husband’s political ad has damaged and continue to undermine Franken’s campaign; not Norm Coleman’s. People vote for a person who can reach across the isle, hold themselves in check and objectively solve problems. Not someone who is emotionally stunted and lacks certain grownup insights. If Franken is the better candidate convince me than. Are there traits he has demonstrated consistently over the years that would compensate and overcome all his past-published character damaging “satireâ€. I tell you what if Franken is considered talented then I have one hell of a career just waiting out there for me has a comedy screen writer of “satireâ€. I think Al’s biggest talent I think is his relentlessness and striving added to that his hunger for the spotlight. I do admit he must have worked hard earning his success in the entertainment writing industry. I respect that about him if not most of his work (including his books).
Can anyone with a straight face tell me that Al Franken has the character, spine, temperament, emotional control, mental maturity, insight, people skills, oratory skills, confidence, intellectual curiosity, self motivation, energy and passion to be U.S. Senator? Nothing turns the voters off more than empty headed, glossy eyed, angry touting candidates who blab out slogans and repeat monotonously, mechanical, sulking, redundant talking points. It’s hard to take the far left base of the DFL serious anymore.
June 24th, 2008 at 12:22 pm
CE: I don’t discuss my methods of sources, but I know that Team Franken and their supporters were pushing this story.
Oh, well I guess that settles that. Well, I don’t disclose my sources either, but I know this ad is a fraud. That settles that, too, then.
June 24th, 2008 at 12:24 pm
Frankent isn’t exactly my ideal of a senatorial candidate. But I think it would be a mistake to make this election about the respective characters of the two candidates. Let’s decide this election on the basis of issues that matter to Minnesotans, not to the variou scandalmongers.
June 24th, 2008 at 1:18 pm
I agree whole heartedly. So I wonder why these bloggers just won’t admit that it was a mistake and move on.
The only reason this is dragging out is because slanderous accusations directed at a candidate if not responded to right away(even if being proven false by articles the press) are harmful.
It is dishonest (and playing dumb) to act the peace broker right after being attacked by “scandalmongers”.
Readers of blogs aren’t dumb they see through this sensational propaganda.
Don’t these liberal bloggers understand that by refusing to acknowledge their mistake they inevitably lose a certain percentage of their readers’ credibility? Some of these readers will move on or lose interest. Blogs are self regulated and if not well done aren’t worth the time to read.
June 24th, 2008 at 1:23 pm
Michael,
Your diligence in keeping this issue alive is much appreciated.
June 24th, 2008 at 1:31 pm
It’s never the crime, it is always the coverup.
June 24th, 2008 at 1:32 pm
Using blue screen technology doesn’t rank very high on the list of what’s scandalous. What can be scandalous is the underlying issues.
Let’s keep this election about the issues, not on the other stuff.
June 24th, 2008 at 2:51 pm
The blogs were wrong that Laurie Coleman was not in this ad. She was in the ad. It was a false charge…†Source: Larry Jacobs, WCCO, June 24, 2008
Hello?
It’s interesting to watch you people deliberately lie and act smug even as the news reports how here right now in the Minnesota twin’s cities area liberal bloggers are trumping up outrageous stories about Norm and Laurie Coleman and their family.
The indisputable fact is:
Norm Coleman’s ad was straightforward and involved no shady tricks. This was irrefutably verified in the press.
You liberals are your own worst enemies. Keep telling (writing) your own reality. I would love to see you tell Larry Jacob’s to his face that this political ad was doctored.
What’s wrong with you people? Are you incapable of differentiating between what you know to be fact and what you wish to be?
It’s a little like trying to reason with a three year old.
June 24th, 2008 at 2:52 pm
I see that Leroy Jenkins has taken a break from attacking Norm and Laurie Coleman’s children. Let’s see how long this lasts.
June 24th, 2008 at 3:00 pm
I never once attacked a child, Coleman’s or otherwise.
I defy you to disprove this fact.
June 24th, 2008 at 3:38 pm
Sorry Leroy, based on your standard, YOU MUST prove that you have never attacked children.
I guess you’re going to have to link to everything you’ve ever written, and we’ll have to decipher that collection of bullshit…. but your denials aren’t good enough.
You have to prove it.
June 24th, 2008 at 3:39 pm
Yep, Mrs. TwoPuttTommy is a child molester. I’ve made the accusation, now Leroy has to prove that it’s false.
Go!
June 24th, 2008 at 3:39 pm
Leroy,
You are like the Manchurian Candidate. You attack but have no memory about your attack. To refresh your memory (such as it is), let’s go back to Comment #10 to the post on this site titled “The Washington Post Reports on the Minnesota Green Screen Debate.”
Here’s what MDE said, in Comment #10, in response to your attack on Norm and Laurie Coleman’s children: “Leroy: Senator Coleman’s son recently graduated from St. Thomas in St. Paul and Senator Coleman’s daughter is going to a Minnesota school. You have no right to post your lies on my blog and if you continue this practice, I will ban you from commenting. This is your only warning.”
As facts go, how’s that one!
June 24th, 2008 at 3:53 pm
Apparently, the liberals are once again using the CBS defense when caught with their hindquarters exposed: the charge is “false, but accurate.” Never mind the actual truth, we’re supposed to be upset that it MIGHT have happened that way. And once again my response would be, so WHAT? It was an image ad; you either buy into the image or not. Al Franken protrays himself as a “satirist” to cover the most outrageous of his statements and writings. It’s not an image I’m buying, but I don’t complain about the production values of his advertising.
June 24th, 2008 at 4:06 pm
2) Larry Pogemiller is a transvestite.
3) TwoPuttTommy and Leroy got married last week in California.
I believe you.
June 24th, 2008 at 4:24 pm
As I understand it (from a highly reliable source) Tommy “johnson” Johnson and Leroy did not in fact get married last week.
The truth (according to that same highly reliable source) is that they are just shacking up.
June 24th, 2008 at 6:09 pm
That makes more sense. First, their parents probably wouldn’t let them go to CA anyway. Secondly, they need to live together for a while to make sure they’re compatible, if you know what I mean.
June 24th, 2008 at 8:51 pm
I second Tim from Woodbury’s comment. It’s also interesting that Larry Jacobs made this comment:
‘However, Jacobs said the ad is a gift for the struggling Franken campaign.
“They have now launched an ad that’s taken the attention away from Al Franken and put it right on Senator Coleman,” said Jacobs.’ – Source WCCO article you sourced.
June 24th, 2008 at 10:01 pm
Eva, Team Gumby, er, ’scuse me, “Team Smokescreen” would actually rather talk about this subject, than Norm’s lapdog act as Chair of the Senate’s Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations.
Just as The Ghost Of Jack Abramoff took down Conrad Burns two years ago; just as The Ghost Of Jack Abramoff is taking down Schaffer “right” now; The Ghost Of Jack Abramoff is going to take ol’ Senator Smokescreen down, too.
The “Family Values” crowd is not going to like the fact that there was forced prostitution and forced abortion at a place where the American Flag flies, and Norm Coleman did nothing.
June 25th, 2008 at 4:47 am
Tommy,
Are you still laboring on that bullshit? JHC, I took that whole line down a couple weeks ago, noting mainly that an entirely different committee has jurisdiction over the Mariana islands. And moreover, what have the Democrats — namely Carl Levin, current chair and past ranking minority member — done about it? What leadership have Democrats offered?
If your entire line weren’t such a load of shit, it would be funnier that some washed up loser like you was so obsessed about it.
June 25th, 2008 at 7:17 am
Chestnut, you’re a bootlicker. The Senate’s Investigations Subcommittee can investigate damn near anything it wants; it’s supposed to investigate corruption in government.
And this may be a surprise to you, because you’re a bootlicker, but it’s not to most thinking people because most thinking people understand that at it’s essence, the Abramoff scandal is about corruption in government.
republiCon Senatorial candidate Shaffer, in Colorado, is obsessing over Abramoff today, because it’s killing his campaign, today. Conrad Burns obsessed over Abramoff two years ago, because it killed his campaign, to years ago.
And The Ghost Of Jack Abramoff will be an important part of this campaign, because Norm “Smokescreen” Coleman, R=Lapdog, did nothing about forced prostitution and forced abortions.
And you claim the Democrats are doing nothing? There’s a whole building full of republiCons that wish you were correct; that building is called The White House:
How Abramoff Pulled White House Strings
A rare glimpse into the behind-the-scenes string pulling that allowed disgraced superlobbyist Jack Abramoff to negotiate the firing of a State Department official is examined today by The Post’s R. Jeffrey Smith.
Levin let Waxman, who chairs the Oversight and Government Reform Committee, do the work.
You’re a simpleton, Chestnut. And the epitome of the base.
June 25th, 2008 at 8:20 am
And any of that supports your ridiculous, ignorant and retarded line of bullshit how, exactly?
You’re one pathetic pile of horse turds, Tommy.
And again, you were bitching about some issue in the Mariana islands, that had nothing to do with government corruption and which is entirely outside the scope of the committee Norm Coleman chaired.
And still, no Democrats on that same committee did a goddam thing. So even if it was under the purview of the committee, it’s not as though Democrats were providing any leadership, you simple-minded, stupid, asshole.
June 25th, 2008 at 8:21 am
And again, since 2006, when the Democrats took over, THEY HAVE NOT ACCOMPLISHED A GODDAM THING… except broken promises. NOT A SINGLE THING HAVE DEMOCRATS ACCOMPLISHED IN 2 YEARS.
Nothing.
June 25th, 2008 at 8:25 am
And finally, if you have substantive evidence of ANYTHING you opine about, please post it. Until then, keep your asinine, retarded conspiracy theories and bullshit to your self.
Geez Tommy, you really are one fucking stupid, socialist piece of crap.
June 25th, 2008 at 8:26 am
Hey, Chestnut – since you obviously don’t know Jack about Abramoff, just ask – your short-bus drivers are actually quite informed.
Someday, you might be.
Doubtful. But, possible….
June 25th, 2008 at 8:53 am
Tommy, since you don’t have any evidence or proof of anything, you’re obviously talking out of your ass to libel the political opposition.
You fascist fuck.
June 25th, 2008 at 9:34 am
Go with that, Chestnut – it makes reality easier for you to ignore.
Oh, and Chestnut? You’re doin’ a heck of a job, demonstrating on this site the current political “thought” of “Family Values” republiCons.
June 25th, 2008 at 10:13 am
Ignore, what, Tommy? What is there to ignore?
All you’ve done is type a bunch of unsupported, malicious bullshit — libel — you fat, fascist gas bag.
June 25th, 2008 at 10:14 am
Tommy,
With your lies and innuendo, you’re doing a heck of a job demonstrating why the DFL is the party of Deceit, Fascism and Libel.
June 25th, 2008 at 11:13 am
Chestnut, here on Terra Firma, Jack “I’m Still Singin’ Like A Canary” Abramoff is still causin’ problems for your party, the GreedOverPrinciples party.
And the more vile your language becomes, tells those that pay attention how much The Ghost Of Jack Abramoff scares the (cheney) out of you bootlickers.
June 25th, 2008 at 11:19 am
Tommy, fat, fascist gas bag,
Until you can substantiate any of the false charges you’re leveling, you’re standing anywhere but on “terra firma.”
Any wad can stand there and tell lies. But it’s an art you’ve mastered.
Like I said, gas bag, substantiate your shit, or shut the hell up.
June 25th, 2008 at 11:27 am
And speaking of Abramoff, here’s the list of Democrats and what they took from him and his clients. In includes 40 Members Of The Senate Democrat Caucus:
* Senator Max Baucus (D-MT) Received At Least – $22,500
* Senator Evan Bayh (D-IN) Received At Least – $6,500
* Senator Joseph Biden (D-DE) Received At Least – $1,250
* Senator Jeff Bingaman (D-NM) Received At Least – $2,000
* Senator Barbara Boxer (D-CA) Received At Least – $20,250
* Senator Maria Cantwell (D-WA) Received At Least – $21,765
* Senator Tom Carper (D-DE) Received At Least – $7,500
* Senator Hillary Clinton (D-NY) Received At Least – $12,950
* Senator Kent Conrad (D-ND) Received At Least – $8,000
* Senator Jon Corzine (D-NJ) Received At Least – $7,500
* Senator Chris Dodd (D-CT) Received At Least – $14,792
* Senator Byron Dorgan (D-ND) Received At Least – $79,300
* Senator Dick Durbin (D-IL) Received At Least – $14,000
* Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) Received At Least – $2,000
* Senator Russ Feingold (D-WI) Received At Least – $1,250
* Senator Tom Harkin (D-IA) Received At Least – $45,750
* Senator Daniel Inouye (D-HI) Received At Least – $9,000
* Senator Jim Jeffords (I-VT) Received At Least – $2,000
* Senator Tim Johnson (D-SD) Received At Least – $14,250
* Senator Ted Kennedy (D-MA) Received At Least – $3,300
* Senator John Kerry (D-MA) Received At Least – $98,550
* Senator Mary Landrieu (D-LA) Received At Least – $28,000
* Senator Pat Leahy (D-VT) Received At Least – $4,000
* Senator Carl Levin (D-MI) Received At Least – $6,000
* Senator Joe Lieberman (D-CT) Received At Least – $29,830
* Senator Blanche Lincoln (D-AR) Received At Least – $14,891
* Senator Barbara Mikulski (D-MD) Received At Least – $10,550
* Senator Patty Murray (D-WA) Received At Least – $78,991
* Senator Bill Nelson (D-FL) Received At Least – $20,168
* Senator Ben Nelson (D-NE) Received At Least – $5,200
* Senator Barack Obama (D-IL) Received At Least – $7,500
* Senator Mark Pryor (D-AR) Received At Least – $2,300
* Senator Jack Reed (D-RI) Received At Least – $3,500
* Senator Harry Reid (D-NV) Received At Least – $68,941
* Senator John Rockefeller (D-WV) Received At Least – $4,000
* Senator Ken Salazar (D-CO) Received At Least – $4,500
* Senator Paul Sarbanes (D-MD) Received At Least – $4,300
* Senator Chuck Schumer (D-NY) Received At Least – $29,550
* Senator Debbie Stabenow (D-MI) Received At Least – $6,250
* Senator Ron Wyden (D-OR) Received At Least – $6,250
I’m sure you’re sweating now Tommy, you fascist gas bag.
June 25th, 2008 at 11:42 am
Oh hey, look… there’s Senator Obama taking $7500 from Abramoff… and look, there’s Carl Levin (the ranking Democrat, now chair of the Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations who took no action to Tommy’s concerns) taking $6000!
And look, there’s Senate Majority Leader Harry Ried, pocketing $68,000!!!!!! Tom Harkin took $45,000; Byron Dorgon took $79,000…
AND HOLY CRAP!!! JOHN KERRY pocketed nearly $100,000!!!!!
Geeeeeeeeeee Wizzzzzzzzzzzz, the Democrats are in to Abramoff so deep, I bet their sweating hard!!! … or maybe that’s why none of them are talking about it right now…. except one arm-chair idiot named Tommy Johnson… who’s trying hard as heck to lie his way to relevance.
Give it up Tommy, you washed up, fascist clown.
June 25th, 2008 at 12:02 pm
I’m not sweating, because – as usual – you’re bootlickin’.
You posted:
“here’s the list of Democrats and what they took from him and his clients.”
ROFLMAO!!! At YOU!!!
http://www.opensecrets.org/indivs/search.php?capcode=8fqwy&name=abramoff&employ=&cand=&state=&zip=&all=Y&old=N&c2008=N&c2006=N&c2004=N&sort=N&page=&page=4
Abramoff never gave a dime to Democrats. He’s your boy; he’s taken down a whole buncha GreedOverPrinciples politicians, and ol’ Smokescreen is next.
You’re pathetic, Chestnut. But those boots you lick sure are shiny!
June 25th, 2008 at 12:08 pm
Say, Bootlicker? er, ’scuse me, “Chestnut”?
This one, just in:
RealClearPolitics Politics Nation Blog
Schaffer has also faced questions about his relationship with Jack Abramoff, which included a fact-finding mission to the Northern Mariana Islands. The fire, which the DSCC has been only too happy to fan, has received significant attention from the Denver Post, though Schaffer maintains he never met or was aware of Abramoff at the time the trip occurred, in 1999.
Why ol’ Smokescreen never investigated Jack Abramoff will dog Coleman this whole election.
But that’s ok, Coleman iss known as a lapdog.
June 25th, 2008 at 12:25 pm
Tommy, do you know what a non sequitur is? Because your entire line of logic (if it can be called that) is riddled with them.
Your information is as relevant to Coleman as transmission grease is to a banana split.
You’re so goddam retarded, it’s amazing you’re not hooked up to a feeding tube.
June 25th, 2008 at 12:35 pm
Say, bootlicker? You claimed Abramoff gave money to democrats. He didn’t. You’re either a bootlickin’ liar, or dumber than a “Dittos, Rush!” ditto-head.
And you still come back for more.
Say, Chestnut? Maybe if you swear some more, some people will believe you.
Thinking people will not. But, hey – why sould you care?
Your friends are short-bussers, just like you.
June 25th, 2008 at 12:39 pm
Hey gas bag,
I provided the list. All that’s contributions from Abramoff and his clients. There’s a pretty good document trail of Democrats doing things for Abramoff clients, and then receiving money for it.
You can ignore it all you want, but your goddam party is in deep. Democrats are the party of corruption. Their in bed with Abramoff just as much as any Republican is.
And at least there are no GOP members stashing bribes in their freezers.
June 25th, 2008 at 12:41 pm
Tommy,
You really are the most idiotic, fascist dirt bag I’ve ever traded jabs with. Ignorant to the core. You’re like a rabid dog ramming it’s idiot head into a wall, too stupid to know what the hell it’s doing, too angry to care.
You illustrate why the DFL is the party of Despots, Fools and Liars.
June 25th, 2008 at 12:47 pm
Bootlicker, you claimed Abramoff gave money to Democrats. You’re either stupid, or a liar. Pick your label, bootlicker.
As far as ColdCash Jefferson goes, if Boy Blunder’s Dept. of inJustice wasn’t so incredibly incompetent (but hey! the whole (cheney)in’ misAdministration is incompetent; why should inJustice be any different?), ColdCash might be in ClubFed by now.
But, thanks for bringing up another case – ColdCashJefferson – that the misAdministration of Boy Blunder (cheney)ed up, bootlicker.
June 25th, 2008 at 1:02 pm
Tommy,
Democrats DID take money from Abramoff’s clients. That’s what I said. And that’s the facts.
Ya fascist gas bag, jerk.
BTW — if Democrats didn’t love their corrupt pals so much, they might not have promoted Jefferson to the house ways and means committee. … and he is on his way to jail, jackass. The Bush Justice Department has been fully competent to date. Of course Democrats had to try to get the evidence thrown out…
Jackass.
June 25th, 2008 at 1:03 pm
Here’s that list again, shit for brains:
* Senator Max Baucus (D-MT) Received At Least – $22,500
* Senator Evan Bayh (D-IN) Received At Least – $6,500
* Senator Joseph Biden (D-DE) Received At Least – $1,250
* Senator Jeff Bingaman (D-NM) Received At Least – $2,000
* Senator Barbara Boxer (D-CA) Received At Least – $20,250
* Senator Maria Cantwell (D-WA) Received At Least – $21,765
* Senator Tom Carper (D-DE) Received At Least – $7,500
* Senator Hillary Clinton (D-NY) Received At Least – $12,950
* Senator Kent Conrad (D-ND) Received At Least – $8,000
* Senator Jon Corzine (D-NJ) Received At Least – $7,500
* Senator Chris Dodd (D-CT) Received At Least – $14,792
* Senator Byron Dorgan (D-ND) Received At Least – $79,300
* Senator Dick Durbin (D-IL) Received At Least – $14,000
* Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) Received At Least – $2,000
* Senator Russ Feingold (D-WI) Received At Least – $1,250
* Senator Tom Harkin (D-IA) Received At Least – $45,750
* Senator Daniel Inouye (D-HI) Received At Least – $9,000
* Senator Jim Jeffords (I-VT) Received At Least – $2,000
* Senator Tim Johnson (D-SD) Received At Least – $14,250
* Senator Ted Kennedy (D-MA) Received At Least – $3,300
* Senator John Kerry (D-MA) Received At Least – $98,550
* Senator Mary Landrieu (D-LA) Received At Least – $28,000
* Senator Pat Leahy (D-VT) Received At Least – $4,000
* Senator Carl Levin (D-MI) Received At Least – $6,000
* Senator Joe Lieberman (D-CT) Received At Least – $29,830
* Senator Blanche Lincoln (D-AR) Received At Least – $14,891
* Senator Barbara Mikulski (D-MD) Received At Least – $10,550
* Senator Patty Murray (D-WA) Received At Least – $78,991
* Senator Bill Nelson (D-FL) Received At Least – $20,168
* Senator Ben Nelson (D-NE) Received At Least – $5,200
* Senator Barack Obama (D-IL) Received At Least – $7,500
* Senator Mark Pryor (D-AR) Received At Least – $2,300
* Senator Jack Reed (D-RI) Received At Least – $3,500
* Senator Harry Reid (D-NV) Received At Least – $68,941
* Senator John Rockefeller (D-WV) Received At Least – $4,000
* Senator Ken Salazar (D-CO) Received At Least – $4,500
* Senator Paul Sarbanes (D-MD) Received At Least – $4,300
* Senator Chuck Schumer (D-NY) Received At Least – $29,550
* Senator Debbie Stabenow (D-MI) Received At Least – $6,250
* Senator Ron Wyden (D-OR) Received At Least – $6,250
June 25th, 2008 at 1:04 pm
Oops… And look who’s doing the bidding of Abramoff and his clients for money:
And, Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) is leading the pack: “Senate Democratic Leader Harry Reid Of Nevada Sent A Letter To [Interior Secretary Gale] Norton On March 5, 2002 … The Next Day, The Coushattas [An Indian Tribe Represented By Abramoff] Issued A $5,000 Check To Reid’s Tax-Exempt Political Group, The Searchlight Leadership Fund.”
Along with Senator Tom Harkin (D-IA) : “Harkin Wrote At Least Three Letters In 2003 Pressing The Government To Release Federal Money To Help The Sac & Fox Tribe In His State Cope With The Temporary Closing Of Its Casino Due To A Tribal Dispute, According To Interior Department Documents Obtained By The Associated Press And Records Provided By Harkin’s Office.”
The esteemed Senator Mary Landrieu, (D-La) joins them: “Sen. Mary Landrieu, D-La., Who Was Engaged In A Tight Re-Election Race In 2002, Sent Her Letter March 6, 2002. That Same Day, The Coushattas Sent $2,000 To Her Campaign And She Received $5,000 More By The End Of That Month. By Year’s End, The Total Had Grown To At Least $24,000.”
As does Sen. Debbie Stabenow (D-MI): “[There Were] Half-Dozen Letters Written Or Signed By 14 Lawmakers On Behalf Of The Tribes. One Was Written Jan. 23, 2003 By [Democrat Sen.] … Debbie Stabenow … On The Saginaw’s Behalf.”
And, don’t forget Sen. Carl Levin (D-MI): “[There Were] Half-Dozen Letters Written Or Signed By 14 Lawmakers On Behalf Of The Tribes. One Was Written Jan. 23, 2003 By [Democrat Sen.] Carl Levin … On The Saginaw’s Behalf.”
June 25th, 2008 at 1:15 pm
Say, bootlicker?
You’re flip-floppin’. But, that’s to be expected; you’re a republiCon.
You claimed Abramoff gave democrats money. You’re either stupid, or a liar. You tell me which; of course, “both” is also correct.
As far as Levin getting donations, from Tribes? Consider this, bootlicker:
http://www.edwards1.com/rose/native/indian-map.htm
The shortbus better be pickin’ you up all summer long, bootlicker: you got a long ways to go for your elevator to reach the top floor, pal.
June 25th, 2008 at 1:19 pm
Tommy, is that the best you got? No wonder nobody else on earth pays attention to your shit.
You’re as irrelevant as you’ll ever be. Just a dumb, washed-up, irrelevant fascist asshole… All the qualities of a good Democrat.
Maybe you can get some of that Abramoff cash that all your Democrat buddies got.
June 25th, 2008 at 1:23 pm
Chestnut,
You can’t argue with Flounder. He’s like a 2 year old that makes up lies, and when caught, he makes up more.
Founder, you are a pathetic clown.
June 25th, 2008 at 1:33 pm
Go with that, Rash Disptick: opensecrets makes stuff up.
Abramoff never gave a dime to a democrat, and FEC records prove it.
Of course, to bootlickers like you, “Facts are stupid things.” Uncle Ronnie said it, you live it.
And that’s why The Small Tent Party is gettin’ smaller every day.
June 25th, 2008 at 1:35 pm
Hey Tommy,
How much did Jack Abramoff give to Norm Coleman?
Hint: ZERO.
June 25th, 2008 at 1:39 pm
Hey, Bootlicker,
How many investigations into Jack Abramoff did Norm Coleman lead?
Hint: ZERO.
And that’s why Abramoff will be Norm’s downfall; ol’ Smokescreen turned a blind-eye to The Jack Abramoff Scandal.
June 25th, 2008 at 2:01 pm
Oh, Bootlicker? Not that it matters, but…
MSNBC
Bush, lawmakers returning Abramoff donations
Move follows lobbyist’s guilty plea in corruption investigation
…Norm Coleman, R-Minn., $3,000 to be refunded or for charity…
Say, Bootlicker?
I wonder if ol’ Smokescreen ever followed through, on that pledge….
June 25th, 2008 at 2:15 pm
So naturally, seeing’s how this Abramoff issue is Public Concern #1, the morning after the Senate majority changed hands, newly annointed Chairman Carl Levin sprang into action.
Oh, wait.
http://levin.senate.gov/senate/investigations/index.html
(scanning, scanning, Abramoff, gotta be here somewhere, still scanning)
Well clearly, Levin must have had bigger fish to fry than Abramoff…
“Bonnie Rushing of Naples, Florida, had a Bank of America card with an interest rate of about 8%. In April 2007, despite a history of timely payments, Bank of America nearly tripled her interest rate to 23%. Ms. Rushing closed her account and complained to the Florida Attorney General, Senator Levin’s subcommittee, and her card sponsor, American Automobile Association. Bank of America eventually restored the 8% rate on her closed account”
Yep. Thanks to the full force of the United States government, and the steadfastness of one of its most senior statesman, Bonnie Rushing of Naples Florida can now sleep at night knowing that the interest rate on her non-existent credit card is not unreasonable.
Interestingly, one of the main areas of investigation that Levin crows about on his own website is titled “Misconduct in the United Nations Oil-for-Food Program “.
Hmmm.
Wonder who spearheaded that initiative?
June 25th, 2008 at 2:24 pm
Yeah, those investigations that were neither a priority or a concern of the Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations before or after Norm Coleman are sure to be his downfall. Right on Tommy, you Grand Poo-Bah Idiot.
Nice work Surly.
June 25th, 2008 at 2:27 pm
I used to drive a Honda Civic.
I traded it in several years ago.
I wonder if Carl could step in to get my payments reduced.
June 25th, 2008 at 2:37 pm
Waxman’s coverin’ for Levin. You guys don’t pay much attention.
June 25th, 2008 at 2:41 pm
Really Tommy? Well in that case, the DOJ was covering for Coleman.
Waxman is a Representative. A stupid, incompetent one at that. He has his job. Levin is, apparently, failing to do his, according to you.
June 25th, 2008 at 2:46 pm
http://www.house.gov/waxman/
(Scanning, scanning, scanning…HEY, Here’s something!)
http://www.house.gov/waxman/dtvtransition.htm
Henry’s going to help pay for my new TV antena!
Seeing’s how I already have satellite, I assume Henry and Carl will make sure that I get a prompt refund on a the purchase I didn’t have to make.
June 25th, 2008 at 4:27 pm
Surly, you should brush up on your google skills.
This one, from page one, of “waxman abramoff”
The Ghost of Jack Abramoff
By CARL HULSE
Published: June 13, 2008
Jack Abramoff must have been one heck of a lobbyist. He has not set foot on Capitol Hill in years yet is still a major player in everyday Congressional life.
Take this week for example. An important Congressional committee issued a report on Mr. Abramoffâ€s contacts with the White House and his interactions with President Bush. His name was splashed across the front-page of the Capitol Hill newspaper Roll Call. He remains a point of contention in at least three contested Congressional races.
All of that from prison, where he has been since November 2006 as the result of his conviction in a fraud case in Florida. He still has not been sentenced for the wide-ranging, Washington-based corruption and influence peddling case that sent one congressman to prison, implicated several others, made convicted felons out of several aides and still generates new disclosures years after he shut down his lobbying business.
Jack isn’t back — he never left. The staying power of the Abramoff corruption case that contributed to the downfall of Congressional Republicans and continues to tarnish the party’s name is impressive by any standard. There is evidently more to come.
June 25th, 2008 at 8:57 pm
That’s some amazing investigation Waxman is conducting. Wow, he’s discovered no additional wrong-doing, and his fishing expidition appears to have no purpose other than to generate headlines.
Typical bullshit Democrat run operation. Spending millions and accomplishing nothing.
Meanwhile, Democrats are taking handouts from Country Wide as the ram their billion dollar mortgage company handout through. Nothing like Democrats rewarding Democrat pals for their corruption.
More dishonest and despicable behavior from the Corruptocrats.
June 25th, 2008 at 9:49 pm
What amazes me, Tommy and Chestnut, is the incredible amount of war profiteering Coleman uncovered which, by its magnitude totally shames the more meager efforts of Truman during World War II. But then, of course, we were not in World War II as long as we’ve been in Iraq, so Coleman had so much more time while we had troops there on the ground, provisioned by Halliburton unlike the military provisioning itself as in WW II, so he had an easier target set and that explains how he uncovered and exposed such massive levels of war profiteering as he did. It was an awsome thing how he managed that. I am impressed.
And on the film thing, I was impressed to learn that Forrest Gump was there at the University of Alabama when it was integrated and Wallace stood at the door then Gump picked up the one dropped book and all, and how – the war wound thing with President Kennedy. It also was almost as impressively awsome as the uncovering of war profiteering Coleman did while chairing the special committee, or seeing a video of the Coleman’s together with their dog, Checkers. Do it Norm.
June 25th, 2008 at 11:20 pm
Eric Z…. let’s see… incoherent, check. Delusional, check. Lacking any semblance of sound judgment, check.
Yup, he’s a liberal.
June 25th, 2008 at 11:27 pm
Chestnut, Waxman’s doing a great job. A bunch of GOPers in Boy Blunder’s WhiteWash House got real problems.
Then again, reality isn’t your strong point.
Bootlicker.