Staunch Republican: "I've had it with Republican smears – and I'm leaving the party."

[Gravitymaster 0]

How about what's been done to Michael Steele? Is this scummy enough?

Quote

Staffers of the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee illegally obtained a copy of Steele's credit report during the 2006 Senate campaign. Researcher Lauren Weiner used Steele's social security number to obtain his credit report from TransUnion. Weiner used Research Director Katie Barge's DSCC credit card to pay for the report. After an internal investigation, the Maryland Democratic Party determined the credit report was obtained illegally, and reported the incident to the U.S. Attorney. Weiner pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor charge of computer fraud and will do 150 hours of community service. Barge resigned from the DSCC. Steele has commented upon the incident: "It is a stain on the entire organization and the operations of the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee. It's the kind of politics that turns people off and demeans the electoral process."

Quote

Black Democratic leaders in Maryland say that racially tinged attacks against Lt. Gov. Michael S. Steele in his bid for the U.S. Senate are fair because he is a conservative Republican.
Such attacks against the first black man to win a statewide election in Maryland include pelting him with Oreo cookies during a campaign appearance, calling him an "Uncle Tom" and depicting him as a black-faced minstrel on a liberal Web log.
Operatives for the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee (DSCC) also obtained a copy of his credit report -- the only Republican candidate so targeted.

Does this make you proud?

[Pubwoof 0]

I don't know where your quotes are coming from, but, assuming they're accurate, I am proud that the Maryland Democratic Party not only investigated the crime, but referred the matter to the feds for prosecution. Had the Rovester been running things instead, this idiotic junior-level staffer would have been promoted to a higher position and any embarrasing details from the report would've made it into a 527 ad paid for by his TX swift-boat buddies. Even though Barge resigned (probably for failure to keep tabs on her expenses), you'll need more than her name on a credit card to establish that this was anything more than the stupid choice of a single wannabe (ie. not an act by the party itself). Honestly, it was right that she quit over it and even more right that Weiner's ass got handed to her by the US Attorney. Why did those things happen? Because Dems don't play that!

As for the actions of supporters, this isn't relevant to the challenge I made. Unless you can cite an actual party-endorsed ad calling Steele an "Uncle Tom" or something similar, we're talking apples and oranges. Even if there was, I could always counter with the racist RNC ad being run against Harold Ford in Tennessee which more or less advocates voting against the black man who goes after white women. If you really want to include the actions of supporters, then you'll have to defend things like pictures of fetuses, "god hates fags" signs, burning crosses, and the goons who recently assaulted someone at a Sen. Macacawitz rally for daring to ask a question. If you really want to have that debate, I suggest you pack a lunch.

The glass isn't always half-full OR half-empty. Sometimes, the glass is just too damn big.

[Gravitymaster 0]

Nice try at spinning and ignoring the facts.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democratic_Senatorial_Campaign_Committee

Quote

The Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee (DSCC) is the Democratic Hill committee for the United States Senate, working to elect Democrats to that body. Senator Jon Corzine of New Jersey was chair for the U.S. Senate election, 2004. On November 15, 2004, Senator Charles Schumer was named to head the organization in preparation for U.S. Senate election, 2006. JB Poersch is the executive director of the committee.

But oh...I'm sure it was just a few overly ambitious (***cough**[deniability]***cough***) low level staffers acting on their own.



-

[Pubwoof 0]

Read your own unattributed quote. It names exactly two people, the gal who got fired and prosecuted for fraudulently obtaining the credit report and the other gal who quit because her credit card was used. If we're trusting your source as you posted it, only two people were involved even if we assume that Barge was aware that her credit card was being used for a fraudulent act. Either way, when the powers that be within the party became aware of the incident, two people ceased being with the party. I find it funny you'd use this case as an argument that the Democrats play anywhere near as dirty as does the administration when the offenders in question were hung out to dry by the Democratic leaders. Are you angry they didn't try to sweep it under the rug like Republicans did with Mark Foley?

It's way beyond obvious to anyone who follows politics what the DSCC is and that a Democratic Senator would be in charge of it alongside a paid executive director and other staff. This is exactly how the Republicans run their counterpart organization (in case you didn't know). How does your posting of a Wikipedia definition of same in any way establish that anyone else knew about this incident aside from the two people in your quote? If this weak "guilt by association" inference is your way of proving that the top leadership was necessarily involved, I can just change a few names to undeniably prove that President Bush should be impeached for ordering the outing of a clandestine CIA agent. I'll just bet that you've once taken the position (maybe even within this forum) that the President would never be involved in something like that even if Rove and Libby outed her on purpose.

By the way, you should really get that cough checked out by a doctor. That, of course, assumes you can afford the insurance to avail yourself of the profits-first health system we have in this country.

The glass isn't always half-full OR half-empty. Sometimes, the glass is just too damn big.

[Gravitymaster 0]

Oh, I'm sure these "low-level staffers" had no ill intent. I mean after all, they were probably just going to use his credit reports to cut out decorations for the office Christmas Holiday Tree. That seems to be a reasonable explaination. One of them actually got a whole 150 hours of community service which in Maryland can include going to an anti-war protest. How nice and all-so innocent.

edited to add
Community service can also include...............get this..........working on a Political Campaign...........


-

[juanesky 0]

Remember, this "isn't relevant" as it clearly shows all is nice and lgal with campaign tactics from the Dems...

"According to some of the conservatives here, it sounds like it's fine to beat your wide - as long as she had it coming." -Billvon

[Gravitymaster 0]

Quote

Remember, this "isn't relevant" as it clearly shows all is nice and lgal with campaign tactics from the Dems...

The DSCC also picked up the legal tab for the "girls". Nothing like taking care of your own so they keep their mouths shut, eh?

-

[akarunway 1]

Quote

How about what's been done to Michael Steele? Is this scummy enough?

Quote

Staffers of the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee illegally obtained a copy of Steele's credit report during the 2006 Senate campaign. Researcher Lauren Weiner used Steele's social security number to obtain his credit report from TransUnion. Weiner used Research Director Katie Barge's DSCC credit card to pay for the report. After an internal investigation, the Maryland Democratic Party determined the credit report was obtained illegally, and reported the incident to the U.S. Attorney. Weiner pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor charge of computer fraud and will do 150 hours of community service. Barge resigned from the DSCC. Steele has commented upon the incident: "It is a stain on the entire organization and the operations of the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee. It's the kind of politics that turns people off and demeans the electoral process."

Quote

Black Democratic leaders in Maryland say that racially tinged attacks against Lt. Gov. Michael S. Steele in his bid for the U.S. Senate are fair because he is a conservative Republican.
Such attacks against the first black man to win a statewide election in Maryland include pelting him with Oreo cookies during a campaign appearance, calling him an "Uncle Tom" and depicting him as a black-faced minstrel on a liberal Web log.
Operatives for the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee (DSCC) also obtained a copy of his credit report -- the only Republican candidate so targeted.

Does this make you proud?

Is that Steele , steal, or steel? LOL

I hold it true, whate'er befall;
I feel it, when I sorrow most;
'Tis better to have loved and lost
Than never to have loved at all.

[Pubwoof 0]

Quote

I defy any of you right wingers posting here to come up with an example of a DNC-sponsored ad which is anywhere near as dishonest or as hateful as what the Roverites are willing to use to smear somebody. Happy hunting!

You can't do it, can you? I never said anything about being nice. If there is any overarching theme to attacks against Democrats it is that they're a bunch of pussies and can't be trusted to fight the good fight. Then, when the Dems show any spine when it comes to responding to the Republican smear tactics, then they're wrong for that too. Damned if they do, damned if they don't I guess.

All I've gotten so far are a couple of red herrings to munch on (very tasty as they may have been) about two paid staffers being reported by their own bosses. It is quite common for an employer to pick up the tab for any legal fees, either by contract or because a single legal team handled any coordinated defense. You again failed to attribute this new claim you're making or post any links for fact checking. So, you believe attending protests qualifies for public service now? Do you actually have a citation for that one, or are you just making shit up now? Aside from the above, your last post is just a restatement of your earlier remark implying that no staffer would do anything wrong unless it was by order of Democratic leadership.

So, if you really want to take this thread into the evil doings of staffers, I guess I get to talk about Watergate, the Iran-Contra scandal, the outing of Valerie Plame, the willful cover up of congressional pedophilia, anyone who arranged meetings with Abramoff, and/or dozens of other acts of misconduct perpetrated by Republicans. You guys won't be winning that argument either, especially if you just keep repeating what you've already said.

The glass isn't always half-full OR half-empty. Sometimes, the glass is just too damn big.

[mnealtx 0]

So, when a Dem campaign does something questionable, it's "one or two staffers"... but when the Reps do, it's "a Rovian plot"...gimme a friggin break...

There's plenty of smears on BOTH sides of the aisle...

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[Gravitymaster 0]

Quote

So, when a Dem campaign does something questionable, it's "one or two staffers"... but when the Reps do, it's "a Rovian plot"...gimme a friggin break...

There's plenty of smears on BOTH sides of the aisle...

Don't forget to add "if it ain't on the web, it didn't happen".

[Pubwoof 0]

Maybe you should read what's been posted too. The example in question, which was not posted by me, names only two names. Am I wrong about that? This very same example also shows that the two individuals were hung out to dry by the party apparatus, which would seem to undermine any claim that this was a Democratic party conspiracy. I also never said that there were no smears being made against Republicans, only that these smears were limited in scope to official conduct and public positions taken. My point is that unlike Democrats, Republicans are willing to engage in officially endorsed smears that are personal, racist, and/or have already been proven to be untrue.

I'm sorry that this may cause dissonance for you guys who might believe that Republicans are every bit as moral and upstanding as they portray themselves to be, but their highly questionable actions bely this sham of an image. Even you guys trying to argue with me here, so far, have been unable or unwilling to do so without disregarding something that's actually been written, deliberately mischaracterizing something that has been written, or just outright making shit up. I'll happily give you a friggin' break as soon as someone provides an example which answers my challenge.

Also, please point out to me where I said that everything bad done by the hands of Republicans was a Rovian plot. Again, so sorry you got this wrong too, but I was talking about actual ads placed and identified as being Republican party ads. It is undisputed public knowledge that Karl Rove, and Ken Mehlman to a lesser extent, are the 'deciders' of what ads go out, how much money is put behind each of them, and where they get placed. This is what their jobs are.

The glass isn't always half-full OR half-empty. Sometimes, the glass is just too damn big.

[mnealtx 0]

When a Republican candidate runs an attack it, it's part of

Quote

"the Rove/Mehlman cabal"

(from your first post in-thread).

Then, after you're provided with the attribution of the DSCC, you turn right back around and say

Quote

"How does your posting of a Wikipedia definition of same in any way establish that anyone else knew about this incident aside from the two people in your quote?"

Therefore, you are in effect saying that the "Rove/Mehlman cabal" know about and are behind ANY attacks on Dems, but attacks on Reps are ONLY done by misguided, isolated staffers and their superiors knew NOTHING about it...

It's also undisputed knowledge that Pelosi / Emanuel decide what ads are run and what money is put behind them...

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706