You've probably already read it, but go back and peruse today's slime job dumped through the Denver Post, and find out what actual connection there is between Abramoff and Schaffer. No, go ahead and read - I'm waiting.
You saw a lot of innuendo and insinuation and character assassination, but no connection. We're used to seeing this kind of political mudslinging and guilt by third-degree association from many of the Lefty blogs, but it's a little more striking when one of Denver's major newspapers would write a headline and a lead that creates an unsubstantiated smear on a public official's character.
First, there's the mundane fact that we don't find until the 30th paragraph in the Post story: The trip was sponsored and paid for by the Traditional Values Coalition. Not Jack Abramoff. Sorry, Lefty conspiracists.
Then there's the revelation that Schaffer has never met, talked with, or taken money from Abramoff - none of which comes out until the 16th paragraph. Thus the Post facilitates Schaffer's sliming.
For contrast, how about a real example of a member of Congress tainted by Jack Abramoff corruption? Democratic Majority Leader Harry Reid took Abramoff donations, met regularly with the criminal lobbyist, and wrote letters for Abramoff's clients, while Abramoff hired a high-ranking Reid staff member.
In the article, Mark Udall's spokesperson uses a vile form of sophistry:
"Given that many Republican members, including Tom DeLay, Bob Ney and Conrad Burns, have lost their seat or gone to prison based on their association with this criminal, it's pretty remarkable that Schaffer seems to be proud of his association with these sleazy Abramoff-sponsored junkets," said Taylor West, a spokeswoman for Schaffer's Democratic opponent, Mark Udall.Nothing new there from West. It's time for the Big Blue Lie Machine and its surrogate the Denver Post to put away the Abramoff card, and start dealing with the facts.
7 comments:
Game over.
Thinking back on the night of November 4, 2008, as you listen to Senator-Elect Mark Udall's victory speech, you will know that this was the moment when it all came crashing down for Bob Schaffer.
The Post tells us about a lawsuit alleging forced abortions and women recruited for the textile industry being diverted to the sex trade, and people sleeping seven to a room (but not saying what size is the room). The Post does not say what is the result of the lawsuit. The Post does not tell us what problems Bob saw in one of the twenty textile factories he visited. Did Bob share that information with the Post? What problems did he report, and to whom? I would like to hear him respond to the Post article, which was clearly designed to make him look bad. He should respond immediately, like McCain did to the New York Times attempt at smearing him.
I linked to your post in the comments section on my blogpost about this story. I missed paragraph thirty in the Post story.
Wait I don't get it. If there's nothing wrong with being associated with Abramoff, then why is it bad that Reid got donations from some of his clients? You can't have it both ways Ben. As to your defense, there's nothing to see here, move along please, it's interesting that you can't separate paying for a trip and arranging one.
Furthermore, if Abramoff really had nothing to do with it, why would Wadhams have to defend the relationship by trying to spin that Schaffer's never met him?
Noah Noah,
Your lack of credibility precedes you. Blinded by hate ... sad.
You're not giving your fellow Democrats a good name by tacitly agreeing that Schaffer has been hit by an unfair slime job, and then gloating that it will cause him to lose. And people wonder why I don't want to be a Democrat....
Ok, let's assume for a minute this trip was all on the up & up. In that case, can you please answer 3 simple questions that would clear this all up.
Post a Comment