Truth bump....
Yeah. Too bad the facts won't get out. Don't expect the witch hunt to stop. The MSM will simply drop this and move on to the next allegation. It's not about the facts and the truth. It's about destroying DeLay and nothing as trivial as the truth will stop them.
Oh, how they hate Tom DeLay. Therefore, he must be the best, the absolute best!!!!!!!!!
As if the Rats didn't already know that.
If this is all it was, looks like DeLay weathered this one out, and his backstabbers will be mud. FReegards....
Whenever, the mediots, the MSM and liberal whacko lunatic politicians try to electronically lynch a Republican, we should look for the 666 mark of George $oreA$$.
As usual, the $oreA$$ 40 pieces of silver/mark is found here:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1381895/posts
Soros Shadow Party Stalks DeLay
FPM ^ | 12 APRIL 2005 | Richard Poe
Posted on 04/12/2005 1:48:32 AM PDT by rdb3
Soros Shadow Party Stalks DeLay
By Richard Poe
FrontPageMagazine.com | April 12, 2005
On the day that Terri Schiavo died — victim of a court order condemning the brain-damaged woman to death by thirst and starvation — Representative Tom DeLay of Texas did what few politicians have the courage to do these days. He spoke his mind.
"This loss happened because our legal system did not protect the people who need protection most," DeLay told Fox News on March 31. "The time will come for the men responsible for this to answer for their behavior."
DeLay’s strong language worried some Republicans. They pointed to an ABC News poll of March 21 purporting to show that 63 percent of Americans wanted Mrs. Schiavo’s feeding tube removed and that 70 percent wanted Congress to stay out of the matter.
However, Tom DeLay does not take his guidance from polls.
On the day of Mrs. Schiavo’s death, DeLay told reporters that Congressional investigators, "will look at an arrogant and out of control judiciary that thumbs its nose at Congress and the President." He suggested that some judges involved in the Schiavo case might face impeachment. "I never thought I’d see the day when a U.S. judge stopped feeding a living American so that they took fourteen days to die," he said.
Fainter hearts in the Republican Party cringed. Yet the very next day, on April 1, pollster John Zogby released survey results showing that 79 percent of Americans opposed removing a feeding tube from someone in Terri Schiavo’s condition. Only 9 percent would remove it.
How to account for such wildly differing results?
It turned out that ABC had used a push poll — a survey worded in such a way as to ensure a predetermined outcome. The ABC poll had misled respondents into thinking that Mrs. Schiavo had "no consciousness" and that her condition was "irreversible."
In the end, neither poll mattered to DeLay. He had spoken his mind boldly, as was his habit. Americans in the heartland took note. Calls of gratitude swamped radio talk shows, such as Rush Limbaugh’s and Sean Hannity’s.
DeLay had given voice to tens of millions of ordinary, hard-working Americans whose opinions seldom reach mass media organizations nor the elite pollsters they employ. He spoke for an anguished but silent majority which recoiled in horror from Terri Schiavo’s killing, and from the runaway judicial system which had ordered it.
DeLay had given middle Americans more than just a voice. He had given them hope. From the Democrat point of view, that made DeLay a very dangerous man.
The Hammer
Through the Schiavo case, grassroots America discovered why DeLay’s Congressional foes call him, "The Hammer."
At age 58, DeLay stands unrivaled as the most powerful and effective Republican leader in Congress. Virtually every Republican legislative breakthrough of the last decade, from the Contract with America to welfare reform and the Balanced Budget Act owes its passage in large part to DeLay’s skill at persuasion.
His public profile is rising fast. Between September 1999 and February 2005, the proportion of Americans who recognize DeLay’s name soared from 46 to 76 percent, according to a Gallup survey commissioned by CNN and USA Today.
Predictably, his rising stature has made him a priority target for dirty tricksters of the left. His ascent to House Majority Leader in January 2003 triggered an onslaught of non-stop mud-slinging. DeLay has endured a two-year barrage of nebulous, petty and mostly ill-founded ethics charges, attack ads, media smear campaigns and dubious popularity polls.
So far, he has weathered the storm. But his accusers persist. In the last three weeks, their attacks have reached a furious crescendo, with calls for DeLay’s resignation screaming from blog sites, editorial pages and television screens across the land.
Mainstream media portray DeLay’s accusers as disinterested "public interest groups" — non-profit organizations standing guard over public virtue, their judgment unsullied by corruption or party allegiance. In reality, of course, the "public interest groups" attacking DeLay have roots in the partisan struggle as deep as any in Washington.
Much evidence suggests that a hidden agenda lurks beneath the camouflage of this sudden outpouring of "ethics" charges. In certain cases, the organizations promoting these charges evince a history and money trail bespeaking a highly specific allegiance.
If we have interpreted the evidence rightly, it would appear that DeLay may be confronting a political machine far wealthier, more ruthless and better skilled at media manipulation than the Democratic Party itself. When the hysteria subsides and the facts are examined, we may learn that DeLay’s foe all along has been the Shadow Party — a murky and inscrutable entity controlled by leftwing billionaire George Soros.
The Soros Attack Machine
"Tom DeLay: He’d like to wash his hands of corruption. …," a voice intones, while a man wearing cuff links and a Rolex watch scrubs his hands. "He can’t wash his hands of corruption. But Congress can certainly wash its hands of Tom DeLay."
This 30-second television ad began running in selected Congressional districts on Thursday, March 31 — only the latest in a long series of media smears targeting DeLay.
"Over a five-day span, ending last Thursday, TV and radio stations and print publications from around the country featured at least 290 stories" discussing ethics allegations against DeLay, reports Alexander Bolton in the March 23 edition of The Hill.
The allegations mostly involve aggressive fundraising tactics of the sort the Clintons honed to a science. To what extent DeLay may be guilty of such missteps remains unclear. Crystal clear is the double standard being applied to his case.
A small but dedicated core of self-appointed ethics "watchdog" groups have labored to keep the charges against DeLay brightly aflame – among them, the Center for Public Integrity; Common Cause; Democracy 21; Public Campaign and Public Citizen.
Often dubbed "non-partisan" by the press, these groups have a long history of coordination with Soros and his Shadow Party. They are beholden to Soros personally for his financial support. His influence often shows itself in their choice of targets.
For instance, the TV ad campaign cited above is sponsored by two groups, both heavily funded by Soros. One, the Campaign for America’s Future (CAF), has received more than $300,000 from Soros' Open Society Institute. The other group, the Public Campaign Action Fund, is a spin-off from the Soros-funded Public Campaign.
In fact, most of the public-interest "watchdogs" currently hounding DeLay are beneficiaries of Soros largesse. Every one of the groups named above have received large contributions from Soros’ Open Society Institute ranging from $275,000 to nearly $2 million.
The Ten-Year Coup
George Soros is one of the most powerful men in the world. His foundations disburse as much as $400 million per year. As a global investor, Soros has amassed a personal fortune estimated at $7.5 billion. He controls an additional $11 billion or so through his investment funds. Soros is one of a handful of mega-investors who can move global markets simply by expressing an opinion on CNN’s Moneyline.
Despite his power, most Americans never heard of Soros until November 11, 2003, when he declared in a Washington Post interview that, "America under Bush is a danger to the world." Ousting Bush, said Soros, "is the central focus of my life… a matter of life and death." Asked if he would spend his last penny to defeat Bush, Soros replied, "If someone guaranteed it."
In the end, Soros did not spend anything close to his last penny on the campaign. But he didn’t need to. Soros achieved something far more important than merely putting John Kerry in the White House. He gained control of the Democratic Party itself.
Soros’ power grab was ten years in the making. Beginning in 1994, he began pouring millions into the campaign finance reform lobby. The result was the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of 2002 (BCRA), commonly known as the McCain-Feingold Act.
As a Wall Street Journal editorial noted on December 30, 2003: "Combine… the $1.7 million that Mr. Soros gave the Center for Public Integrity, the $1.3 million he gave Public Campaign, the $300,000 to Democracy 21, the $625,000 to Common Cause, and the $275,000 to Public Citizen – and you can be forgiven for believing Mr. Soros got campaign finance passed all by himself."
Note that all five of the organizations listed above are now attacking Tom DeLay.
What did the McCain-Feingold Act do for George Soros? Why did he spend seven years and millions of dollars pursuing it? It now appears to have been a power play, whose purpose was to gain control of the Democratic Party.
The McCain-Feingold Act barred political parties from collecting "soft money" — that is, donations which are earmarked for no particular candidate, and which are therefore exempt from federal limits on their size. Under McCain-Feingold, the parties could only accept heavily regulated "hard money" donations limited to $2,000 per donor, per candidate.
This rule put the Democratic Party in peril. Republicans had long enjoyed a three-to-one advantage over Democrats in raising hard money. Consequently, Democrats depended for their survival on huge donations from unions, corporations and wealthy individuals — that is, they depended on soft money.
Now Soros had cut off the Democrats’ soft-money supply. The Party seemed doomed. But Soros showed them a way out. He offered Democrats an alternate money source — one which he personally controlled. That source was the Shadow Party.
The Shadow Party
Journalists first started using the term "shadow party" in 2003 to describe the network of leftwing NGOs, activist Web sites, Section 527 "stealth PACs," public employee unions and radical foundations which Democrat activists used to circumvent McCain-Feingold in the 2004 campaign. Working independently of the Democratic Party, these private groups managed to raise a record $300 million in political contributions for Democrats running in 2004.
The Shadow Party has gotten a fair amount of press. However, most reporters failed to describe it accurately. They characterized the Shadow Party as a loose network of private groups that arose more or less spontaneously from grassroots America. Nothing could have been further from the truth.
The Shadow Party is a top-down creation. George Soros founded it, organized it and runs it to this day, through a tightly-integrated, corporate-style command structure. Soros fulfills a role in the Shadow Party comparable to that of chairman of the board, while former Clinton deputy chief of staff Harold Ickes serves as de facto CEO.
It took years of patient sleuthing to penetrate the Shadow Party’s secrets — a research effort led by conservative activist David Horowitz, who heads the Center for the Study of Popular Culture (CSPC) in Los Angeles. Much of this research can now be found at DiscovertheNetwork.org — a searchable, online database of the organized left which Horowitz launched in February 2005.
DiscovertheNetwork.org illuminates the intricate personal and financial relationships binding leftwing organizations together. While compiling this database, Horowitz and his team uncovered the hidden command structure that drives Soros’ Shadow Party.
As one of the researchers on that team, I worked with Horowitz to follow the money trail and identify the specific levers of control by which Soros steers his Shadow Party. Horowitz and I co-wrote a three-part exposé published on the CSPC Web site FrontPageMagazine.com in October 2004. In it, we revealed that Soros administers his network through a core group of seven non-profit organizations, which we named the Seven Sisters. They are, in alphabetical order: America Coming Together; America Votes; Center for American Progress; Joint Victory Campaign 2004; The Media Fund; MoveOn.org; and the Thunder Road Group.
Through these Seven Sisters, Soros and his team convey money, information and marching orders down the line to a much larger network encompassing radical public employee unions, leftwing foundations and street-level activist groups.
The network has emerged as a veritable shadow government, wielding the power to make or break politicians at the highest level. The sudden convergence of Soros-sponsored "public interest" groups in the attack on DeLay smacks of coordination. It suggests that Soros has focused the full might of his Shadow Party on an effort to discredit Tom DeLay and force his resignation as House Majority Leader.
With DeLay neutralized, Democrats will be free to pursue another priority goal of George Soros — to spend the next three years packing our federal courts with leftwing extremists, right up to the U.S. Supreme Court. They will fill the benches with corrupt, radical judges cut from the same cloth as those who sent Terri Schiavo to her grave.
The Left Triumphant
In the 2004 election cycle, Soros donated about $27 million of his personal funds to anti-Bush forces — the largest political contribution from a single individual in U.S. history. More importantly, the Shadow Party Soros created raised more than $300 million for the cause.
John Kerry may have lost the election, but the Shadow Party emerged triumphant. The Democrats can no longer function without Shadow Party cash.
Regarding the Democratic Party, MoveOn PAC director and Soros operative Eli Pariser boasted, "Now it’s our party. We bought it, we own it."
The Shadow Party’s ascendancy marks a victory for the left — and in particular for Soros’ idiosyncratic vision of social utopia. Soros’ philanthropy has long promoted a phantasmagoria of radical causes such as medical rationing, euthanasia, gay rights, gun control, avant-garde education, regulation of political speech through campaign finance laws and the promotion of judicial activism. In his 1998 book The Crisis of Global Capitalism, Soros foretold the end of free enterprise.
His Shadow Party has emerged today as the ultimate instrument for inflicting his radical agenda on America.
In the November 29, 2004 issue of the Marxist journal The Nation, Robert L. Borosage co-wrote an article with Nation editor Katrina Vanden Heuvel. They wrote: "[P]rogressives drive this party now - we provide the energy, the organizers, the ground forces, the ideas, and much of the money. We should organize the opposition [against Republicans]. Progressives should mount a powerful assault on Republican boss Tom DeLay."
Borosage typifies the sort of people who fill high-level leadership positions in the Shadow Party. A hard-left militant during the '60s and a graduate of Yale Law School — where he served as a political mentor to young Hillary Rodham - Borosage subsequently headed the National Lawyers Guild, a radical organization that began in the 1930s as a Soviet front, operated in conjunction with the Communist Party and to this day basks comfortably in its Communist heritage. Later Borosage headed the Institute for Policy Studies, a far left Washington think tank that has enjoyed close and unsavory involvements with Soviet and Cuban intelligence operations.
Borosage currently serves as co-director of the Campaign for America's Future (CAF) - a leftwing activist group founded in 1996, whose list of advisors includes Sixties radical Tom Hayden; former SDS president Todd Gitlin; former SDS radical Heather Booth; NOW founder Betty Friedan; Jesse Jackson and social scientist and activist Frances Fox Piven, a founder of the "welfare rights movement" of the late '60s and early '70s whose strategy of deliberately overloading welfare rolls to break the "system" actually bankrupted New York City.
In a July 25, 2004 article, Shadow Party operative Simon Rosenberg — who is president of the New Democrat Network — told Matt Bai of The New York Times Magazine that the independent 527 committees which form the backbone of Soros’ Shadow Party would spearhead a "more defiant kind of politics." As Bai put it, these independent groups could go where no Democrat could go before. They could confront head-on the "sharp ideological divide between them and the Rush Limbaugh right." They would be free to attack ideological foes with a Machiavellian abandon previously unknown in mainstream politics — ideological foes such as Tom DeLay.
Of course, DeLay is not the sort of man who would suffer such attacks without a fight. On April 7, as a rising chorus of journalists, pollsters, leftwing activists and "public interest groups" screamed for his resignation as House Majority Leader, DeLay went on the offensive.
Speaking by video to the Judeo-Christian Council for Constitutional Restoration — a conservative religious group — DeLay warned sternly of "a judiciary run amok."
"The judiciary branch of our government has overstepped its authority on countless occasions, overturning and in some cases just ignoring the legitimate will of the people…," he said. "Our next step, whatever it is, must be more than rhetoric."
And so it will be. Americans today are aboil with rage that no push poll can hide. DeLay may stand or fall before his attackers. No one can predict his fate. But with or without DeLay, that "next step" of which he spoke will come, and the people will be heard.
Richard Poe is a writer for the Center for the Study of Popular Culture, as well as managing editor of David Horowitz's group blog Moonbat Central. He is a New York Times-bestselling author and journalist whose blog appears at RichardPoe.com. Poe's latest book is Hillary’s Secret War: The Clinton Conspiracy to Muzzle Internet Journalists.
Good thread.
Regarding the rats, it's THEIR TURN. Now we have a chance for armored counter-attack AND those of us who want to impeach judges are stronger than ever.
Regarding DeLay: I think NRO summed it up very nicely:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1363204/posts
DeLay Tactics
"...Just days before DeLay's trip KORUSEC had changed its financial status by registering as a foreign agent. Under the new registration members of Congress are not allowed to accept such trips..."
It's Hammer Time!!
Anybody have a direct email link? I want to send a message of support, but don't live in his district.
bump
Hey RATS.....can you say "projection"? Sick bass-turds!
|
|
Name |
Party |
Trip Costs |
|
1 |
John Breaux - Democratic Party - $158,311.92 |
Democratic Party |
$ 158,311.92 |
|
2 |
Robert Wexler - Democratic Party - $155,137.21 |
Democratic Party |
$ 155,137.21 |
|
3 |
Gene Green - Democratic Party - $153,873.02 |
Democratic Party |
$ 153,873.02 |
|
4 |
Maurice Hinchey - Democratic Party - $152,169.25 |
Democratic Party |
$ 152,169.25 |
|
5 |
Cal Dooley - Democratic Party - $148,562.50 |
Democratic Party |
$ 148,562.50 |
|
6 |
Evan Bayh - Democratic Party - $142,884.94 |
Democratic Party |
$ 142,884.94 |
|
7 |
Maxine Waters - Democratic Party - $132,219.23 |
Democratic Party |
$ 132,219.23 |
|
8 |
James Clyburn - Democratic Party - $129,540.79 |
Democratic Party |
$ 129,540.79 |
|
9 |
Philip English - Republican Party - $129,231.54 |
Republican Party |
$ 129,231.54 |
|
10 |
Jim McDermott - Democratic Party - $128,725.91 |
Democratic Party |
$ 128,725.91 |
|
11 |
Harold Rogers - Republican Party - $126,882.93 |
Republican Party |
$ 126,882.93 |
|
12 |
Gregory Meeks - Democratic Party - $126,690.08 |
Democratic Party |
$ 126,690.08 |
|
13 |
John Boehner - Republican Party - $126,537.08 |
Republican Party |
$ 126,537.08 |
|
14 |
F. James Sensenbrenner - Republican Party - $126,424.65 |
Republican Party |
$ 126,424.65 |
|
15 |
James Greenwood - Republican Party - $121,890.57 |
Republican Party |
$ 121,890.57 |
|
16 |
George Miller - Democratic Party - $119,368.70 |
Democratic Party |
$ 119,368.70 |
|
17 |
Richard Lugar - Republican Party - $113,279.68 |
Republican Party |
$ 113,279.68 |
|
18 |
Ed Pastor - Democratic Party - $111,438.89 |
Democratic Party |
$ 111,438.89 |
|
19 |
Philip Crane - Republican Party - $109,994.72 |
Republican Party |
$ 109,994.72 |
|
20 |
Donald Payne - Democratic Party - $105,503.23 |
Democratic Party |
$ 105,503.23 |
|
21 |
David Price - Democratic Party - $105,047.18 |
Democratic Party |
$ 105,047.18 |
|
22 |
Dana Rohrabacher - Republican Party - $102,982.41 |
Republican Party |
$ 102,982.41 |
|
23 |
Ander Crenshaw - Republican Party - $102,967.56 |
Republican Party |
$ 102,967.56 |
|
24 |
Howard Berman - Democratic Party - $97,203.35 |
Democratic Party |
$ 97,203.35 |
|
25 |
Paul Sarbanes - Democratic Party - $93,045.01 |
Democratic Party |
$ 93,045.01 |
|
26 |
Joseph Biden - Democratic Party - $90,906.28 |
Democratic Party |
$ 90,906.28 |
|
27 |
Lloyd Doggett - Democratic Party - $86,084.67 |
Democratic Party |
$ 86,084.67 |
|
28 |
Don Nickles - Republican Party - $84,171.90 |
Republican Party |
$ 84,171.90 |
|
29 |
Tom DeLay - Republican Party - $82,390.71 |
Republican Party |
$ 82,390.71 |
|
30 |
Shelley Berkley - Democratic Party - $82,359.05 |
Democratic Party |
$ 82,359.05 |
|
31 |
Solomon Ortiz - Democratic Party - $80,835.45 |
Democratic Party |
$ 80,835.45 |
|
32 |
Henry Waxman - Democratic Party - $80,306.69 |
Democratic Party |
$ 80,306.69 |
|
33 |
Joseph Crowley - Democratic Party - $79,807.23 |
Democratic Party |
$ 79,807.23 |
|
34 |
Don Young - Republican Party - $79,615.31 |
Republican Party |
$ 79,615.31 |
|
35 |
Tom Lantos - Democratic Party - $79,005.14 |
Democratic Party |
$ 79,005.14 |
|
36 |
Jesse Jr. Jackson - Democratic Party - $77,858.53 |
Democratic Party |
$ 77,858.53 |
|
37 |
John Duncan, Jr. - Republican Party - $77,042.33 |
Republican Party |
$ 77,042.33 |
|
38 |
Doug Bereuter - Republican Party - $77,005.14 |
Republican Party |
$ 77,005.14 |
|
39 |
Thomas Allen - Democratic Party - $75,722.97 |
Democratic Party |
$ 75,722.97 |
|
40 |
Todd Tiahrt - Republican Party - $69,791.20 |
Republican Party |
$ 69,791.20 |
|
41 |
Michael Castle - Republican Party - $69,671.29 |
Republican Party |
$ 69,671.29 |
|
42 |
Rush Holt - Democratic Party - $67,950.43 |
Democratic Party |
$ 67,950.43 |
|
43 |
Eliot Engel - Democratic Party - $67,471.23 |
Democratic Party |
$ 67,471.23 |
|
44 |
Stephanie Jones - Democratic Party - $67,331.76 |
Democratic Party |
$ 67,331.76 |
|
45 |
Sherrod Brown - Democratic Party - $66,203.33 |
Democratic Party |
$ 66,203.33 |
|
46 |
David Obey - Democratic Party - $65,838.01 |
Democratic Party |
$ 65,838.01 |
|
47 |
Barbara Lee - Democratic Party - $65,321.21 |
Democratic Party |
$ 65,321.21 |
|
48 |
Tom Udall - Democratic Party - $63,597.18 |
Democratic Party |
$ 63,597.18 |
|
49 |
Frank Murkowski - Republican Party - $63,519.79 |
Republican Party |
$ 63,519.79 |
|
50 |
Jim McCrery - Republican Party - $62,008.52 |
Republican Party |
$ 62,008.52 |
|
51 |
Howard Coble - Republican Party - $61,874.65 |
Republican Party |
$ 61,874.65 |
|
52 |
Bob Graham - Democratic Party - $61,696.90 |
Democratic Party |
$ 61,696.90 |
|
53 |
Pete Sessions - Republican Party - $61,619.49 |
Republican Party |
$ 61,619.49 |
|
54 |
Constance Morella - Republican Party - $60,701.60 |
Republican Party |
$ 60,701.60 |
|
55 |
Barbara Boxer - Democratic Party - $60,233.91 |
Democratic Party |
$ 60,233.91 |
|
56 |
Christopher Shays - Republican Party - $59,719.83 |
Republican Party |
$ 59,719.83 |
|
57 |
Barney Frank - Democratic Party - $59,676.55 |
Democratic Party |
$ 59,676.55 |
|
58 |
W.J. Tauzin - Republican Party - $59,539.21 |
Republican Party |
$ 59,539.21 |
|
59 |
Michael Oxley - Republican Party - $59,393.68 |
Republican Party |
$ 59,393.68 |
|
60 |
Olympia Snowe - Republican Party - $58,526.22 |
Republican Party |
$ 58,526.22 |
|
61 |
Rick Boucher - Democratic Party - $58,098.38 |
Democratic Party |
$ 58,098.38 |
|
62 |
Janice Schakowsky - Democratic Party - $57,822.06 |
Democratic Party |
$ 57,822.06 |
|
63 |
Ed Whitfield - Republican Party - $57,529.98 |
Republican Party |
$ 57,529.98 |
|
64 |
Harold Ford, Jr. - Democratic Party - $57,430.59 |
Democratic Party |
$ 57,430.59 |
|
65 |
Mike Thompson - Democratic Party - $57,121.06 |
Democratic Party |
$ 57,121.06 |
|
66 |
Charles Stenholm - Democratic Party - $56,150.96 |
Democratic Party |
$ 56,150.96 |
|
67 |
Melvin Watt - Democratic Party - $55,372.62 |
Democratic Party |
$ 55,372.62 |
|
68 |
Wally Herger - Republican Party - $55,169.64 |
Republican Party |
$ 55,169.64 |
|
69 |
Jim Kolbe - Republican Party - $54,720.66 |
Republican Party |
$ 54,720.66 |
|
70 |
Pat Roberts - Republican Party - $54,681.41 |
Republican Party |
$ 54,681.41 |
|
71 |
Sander Levin - Democratic Party - $54,494.71 |
Democratic Party |
$ 54,494.71 |
|
72 |
Corrine Brown - Democratic Party - $54,351.70 |
Democratic Party |
$ 54,351.70 |
|
73 |
Jerry Weller - Republican Party - $54,059.60 |
Republican Party |
$ 54,059.60 |
|
74 |
Sam Farr - Democratic Party - $53,380.53 |
Democratic Party |
$ 53,380.53 |
|
75 |
Bob Barr - Republican Party - $53,297.98 |
Republican Party |
$ 53,297.98 |
|
76 |
Dennis Moore - Democratic Party - $52,678.44 |
Democratic Party |
$ 52,678.44 |
|
77 |
Tom Sawyer - Democratic Party - $52,286.35 |
Democratic Party |
$ 52,286.35 |
|
78 |
Eni Faleomavaega - Democratic Party - $52,197.42 |
Democratic Party |
$ 52,197.42 |
|
79 |
Danny Davis - Democratic Party - $52,074.72 |
Democratic Party |
$ 52,074.72 |
|
80 |
Loretta Sanchez - Democratic Party - $51,651.58 |
Democratic Party |
$ 51,651.58 |
|
81 |
David Hobson - Republican Party - $50,586.60 |
Republican Party |
$ 50,586.60 |
|
82 |
Earl Blumenauer - Democratic Party - $50,465.15 |
Democratic Party |
$ 50,465.15 |
|
83 |
Ted Stevens - Republican Party - $50,393.02 |
Republican Party |
$ 50,393.02 |
|
84 |
Bob Etheridge - Democratic Party - $49,911.23 |
Democratic Party |
$ 49,911.23 |
|
85 |
Scott McInnis - Republican Party - $49,852.59 |
Republican Party |
$ 49,852.59 |
|
86 |
Eva Clayton - Democratic Party - $49,852.19 |
Democratic Party |
$ 49,852.19 |
|
87 |
Joe Barton - Republican Party - $49,534.95 |
Republican Party |
$ 49,534.95 |
|
88 |
Nancy Johnson - Republican Party - $49,515.85 |
Republican Party |
$ 49,515.85 |
|
89 |
Ernie Fletcher - Republican Party - $49,404.30 |
Republican Party |
$ 49,404.30 |
|
90 |
William Thomas - Republican Party - $47,594.15 |
Republican Party |
$ 48,594.15 |
|
91 |
Nick Rahall, II - Democratic Party - $48,345.99 |
Democratic Party |
$ 48,345.99 |
|
92 |
Christopher Dodd - Democratic Party - $47,135.32 |
Democratic Party |
$ 47,135.32 |
|
93 |
Kent Conrad - Democratic Party - $46,647.38 |
Democratic Party |
$ 46,647.38 |
|
94 |
Robert Ney - Republican Party - $46,095.35 |
Republican Party |
$ 46,095.35 |
|
95 |
Richard Burr - Republican Party - $45,871.40 |
Republican Party |
$ 45,871.40 |
|
96 |
William Jefferson - Democratic Party - $45,372.86 |
Democratic Party |
$ 45,372.86 |
|
97 |
Ileana Ros-Lehtinen - Republican Party - $44,971.00 |
Republican Party |
$ 44,971.00 |
|
98 |
Darrell Issa - Republican Party - $44,956.65 |
Republican Party |
$ 44,956.65 |
|
99 |
Amo Houghton - R - $44,539.43 |
Republican Party |
$ 44,539.43 |
|
100 |
James Moran - Democratic Party - $43,531.49 |
Democratic Party |
$ 43,531.49 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Democrats |
|
|
|
|
$ 4,584,300.46 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Republicans |
|
|
|
|
$ 3,050,556.57 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Democratic Party |
|
|
|
|
Number of trips for party members: 2730 |
|
|
|
|
Total spent on party members: $7,809,837.87 |
|
|
|
|
Percentage of total spent on party: 54.3% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Independent Party |
|
|
|
|
Number of trips for party members: 22 |
|
|
|
|
Total spent on party members: $53,830.93 |
|
|
|
|
Percentage of total spent on party: 0.4% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Republican Party |
|
|
|
|
Number of trips for party members: 2095 |
|
|
|
|
Total spent on party members: $6,512,990.35 |
|
|
|
|
Percentage of total spent on party: 45.3% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Source: http://americanradioworks.publicradio.org/features/congtravel/index.html |
||
Truth and Facts bump.
I'd like for my representative to stay here and work toward solving OUR problems.
Is that too much to expect?
http://www.tomdelay.com/public/GENYUSGY534234432.aspx
Dismissal of Bell Complaint
DeLay Statement on Unanimous Dismissal of Bell Complaint
WASHINGTON- House Majority Leader Tom DeLay (R-Texas) today released the following statement:
“The Ethics Committee has done the right thing in dismissing Mr. Bell's embellished allegations with bipartisan unanimity. While the allegations were dismissed, I accept the Committee's guidance. Mr. Bell displayed contempt for Congress by manipulating the ethics process in pursuit of his personal vendetta, and today's dismissal says more about Mr. Bell's conduct than it does about anything else.
“The Committee was forced to complete its work in a highly divisive atmosphere fostered by politically motivated individuals and entities who have attempted to tamper with and influence the congressional ethics process for partisan gain.
“For years, Democrats have hurled relentless personal attacks at me, hoping to tie my hands and smear my name. All have fallen short, not because of insufficient venom, but because of insufficient merit.
“Mr. Bell's allegations, coordinated with one of these groups, intentionally misstated law and facts and violated the spirit and letter of House Ethics Rules. Although I believe this filing should have been thrown out immediately, I have spent the last four months cooperating with the Committee fact-finding. To expedite this matter, I even offered to waive my rights to bring this matter to closure. I'm glad this matter has been brought to its conclusion.
“I would invite my political opponents to engage the battle of ideas instead of misusing the congressional ethics process or abusing the legal system in a misguided attempt to settle scores.
“I'll continue to work hard to advance the cause of Republican governance, which I believe is critical to America's security, prosperity, and families.”
Like Rush says......It's not the nature of the evidence, it's the seriousness of the charges.