Posted on 01/26/2006 10:47:14 AM PST by NormsRevenge
DNC Chairman Howard Dean on NBC Today Show ^
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1565443/posts
Big Media refuses to set the record straight.
Hey guys...Im starting to think these Demoncats will LIE to get back into power...??
To the Democrats the disqualifier is the word "affliated." Abramoff "Affiliated" money as opposed to direct donations from Abramoff himself. That's the spin from the Dems.
All very well.
But the DNC gets to make its point on the Today Show and on the front pages of the New York Times and the Washington Post.
In response, the RNC gets to send out a press release that the media will ignore.
Technically, Dean did not lie, as he claimed the Donks did not take "one dime" from Abramoff. They took a helluva lot of dimes from Abramoff.
Starting? /double sarcasm
I thought Katie Couric was very tough interviewing Dean this morning.
That's a little scary as, IIRC, Reid said the same thing "not one dime" during the interview with Chris Wallace.
Yes, the democrats get their point of view printed in the newspaper as "news". Republicans must purchase advertising to get their point of view printed.
That is why it is important for us to donate to Republican causes. $50 at a time adds up if enough of us do it. Republicans get way more of their funds from small donors than do democrats.
(Or would that be a "Clintonian word game"?)
Well, I have a job that lets me have time to post, so let's see. There are ten dimes to a dollar, one hundred dimes to ten dollars, and all of the people on the above list (and the others that aren't shown) received much more than 100 dimes.
Sorry, Dean (well, not really 'sorry') you got eaten by one of your own this morning. Sweet dreams.
Not to defend Howard Dean (shudder), but I think he meant to say that no money was given directly from Abramoff to a Democrat. All money given to Democrats came from PACs.
I'm sorry, but they're just taking the wrong approach to this. This is just like Bush's substitution of "WMD-related program activities" in his SOTU address when it became clear that he couldn't say WMD with a straight face anymore.
Let's face it, "affiliated" is pretty weasly wordage. If they've got the goods -- the real hard goods -- on some Democrats, then they should use it. But resorting to weasel words only weakens whatever case they may have.
bump for later usage against the rats
They have a fascinating collection of articles about Dem corruption and hypocrisy.
Thanks for the link!
Screw Abramoff. The cows at the Lompoc dairy will keep him occupied soon enough.
Let's go get McDermott and Reid instead.
Can't wait for the Ethics Committee to gavel into session... and none too soon. ;-)
Thanks! Looks like an interesting site.
As far as I know, Abramoff didn't give the money directly to Republicans, either. He was the go-between who specified who got what, and the money went to Democrats and Republicans alike straight from the Indians.
I think a woman on TV news whose name I forget got in terrible trouble with the left a day or two ago for saying that. It's a big secret!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.