11/3/2006
The Most Corrupt Man in Montana
by Shane Mason on 6:35 am.
Scandals, bribery and greed follow Burns like dust followed Pigpen on Peanuts. It’s all over him like a cheap suit (or white on rice). This isn’t really new, but it is rearing its head again. I have never seen his Washington office, but I am pretty sure that Burns has a sign outside his office that says:
FEDERAL JUDICIAL APPOINTMENTS
$5000
I wonder if he issues coupons or has bluelight specials? It constantly amazes me how cheap that dude will sell us all out for. A new report called Money Trails to the Federal Bench details how American justice is up for sale to the highest bidder. It details how Burns took the maximum donation from a judge candidate just one day before recommending him for a federal appointment.
Burns is crooked and it stinks to high heaven. Read the full report here [PDF Document].
| Comments (23) | Permanent Link | Categories: '06, Conrad Burns, dickhead, elections, political |
11/1/2006
Max Does the Right Thing. Thanks.
by Shane Mason on 11:14 pm.
I pointed out how sleazy it is that Burns has been trying to piggy back on Max Baucus’s popularity. He has been pulling a page from the Rehberg playbook and campaigning as a democrat, using Baucus’s record and hiding his own. Following the radio ad that ran in the Butte area disputing Burns’s claims, Tester is now running a television ad where Max sets the record straight. Matt McKenna says the ad will be running statewide and
you would have to be under a large rock in a deep hole not to see this ad over the next week
In truth, I think that the ad is very powerful. See for yourself.
| Comments (7) | Permanent Link | Categories: '06, Conrad Burns, dickhead, elections, montana, political |
Burns is Embarrassing Us Again…
by Shane Mason on 10:15 am.
Burns once again made the state of Montana look stupid in the national spotlight. This time it was the Daily Show. They showed clips from the Helena debate where Tester claimed there was no plan in Iraq and Burns responded that there was a plan, only it was a secret plan. Stewart looked completely bemused and thanked Burns for protecting Bush’s super secret plan that was so secret he was not even telling the Army about it…
Stewart notes that a vote for Jon Tester is a vote for blowing Bush’s elaborate super secret plan…
Video of the debate
See the whole episode at Comedy Central.
UPDATE: Touchstone let us know in the comments that the video is up at Crooks and Liars.
| Comments (7) | Permanent Link | Categories: Conrad Burns, dickhead, montana, political |
They Are The Dividers…
by Shane Mason on 12:00 am.
President Bush will be here later this week to stump for Conrad Burns. Is he coming here as the decider? The uniter? No, he coming as the divider. Here is a preview from speeches he has made this week:
“When it comes to listening to the terrorists, what’s the Democrats’ answer? It’s just say no. When it come to detaining terrorists, what is the Democrats’ answer Just say no. When it comes to questioning terrorists, what’s the Democrats’ answer? Just say no. When it comes to trying terrorists, what’s the Democrats’ answer. Just say no.â€
He is not saying ‘the Republican plan to keep America safe is better than the Democrats’. What he is saying here is that we want the terroris to succeed. We want to see American lives lost. This isn’t how we work together, this is how we marginalize 50% of the American population.
“The Democrat approach in Iraq comes down to this: The terrorists win, and America loses.â€
I could point out that with over 100 Americans killed in Iraq this month, his approach to Iraq is working out really poorly. I am not saying that he wants us to fail. I am simply pointing out that he is incapable of a coherent strategy. There is a difference here. I am not questioning his motivation as he questions all democrats.
You can say that my ideas are wrong and I will have an active and spirited debate with you on that. However, if you question my motivations or patriotism then the debate is off the table and a fight is on the table. Too often that is what it comes down to from both sides and it is simply not OK. We have heard it time and again from this president and Conrad Burns. I hear it echoed here from thoughtless commenters “The democrats want us to fail in Iraq“. No, we don’t want to see people die. We don’t want to hear the death tolls everyday. If that was our goal we would not be trying to force a strategy, we would let Bush’s ’secret’ plan continue. Failure is where that secret plan is headed.
We want America to succeed with its values intact: the values of acceptance, equality and all the right granted us in the constitution. We want us to be the nation that works together to solve it’s problems. We don’t want to be a country that marginalizes 50% of it’s population. We want to be a country called The United States of America. We are done with dividers, we want uniters. We are taking our country back and we are starting on Tuesday.
| Comments (17) | Permanent Link | Categories: '06, Conrad Burns, dickhead, elections, ideologues, montana, political, republicans |
10/30/2006
Never Never Never. Well, sometimes.
by Shane Mason on 12:34 am.
OK, a lot then.
Oh yeah. This is very real folks. Get the fact sheet here. Conrad, you got pwnd!
| Comments (6) | Permanent Link | Categories: '06, Conrad Burns, dickhead, elections, political |
10/29/2006
Really Really dirty little man
by Shane Mason on 1:25 am.
OK, I have not seen this article, but I heard a radio ad for Tester where Baucus talks about it. Then tonight I saw one of the Burns commercial that started it all. I will summarize it here:
Burns and Baucus. Baucus and Burns. Burns and Baucus. Baucus and Burns. Baucus Baucus Baucus, so vote Burns.
Heh, you’ld think they were best friends. Not so, it seems:
HELENA - Democratic Sen. Max Baucus cried foul Friday over Republican Sen. Conrad Burns and the national GOP using his name in advertisements and fliers that suggest he backs Burns over Jon Tester for the Senate.
“I don’t like it,†Baucus said in a phone interview. “It misleads Montana voters and it implies that I don’t support Jon Tester. I strongly support Jon Tester. I think he’s the better man.â€
Baucus said Burns has ignored a letter from his chief of staff and a phone call from Baucus asking him to refrain from using his name in the radio ads, which have now expanded to television.
Talk about a sniveling little man trying to piggyback on another’s record! The central message is: “Baucus is a senator and you like him. I am a senator too, so you must like me.”
“It’s very misleading,†Baucus said. “I’ve raised a lot of money for him (Tester). I think he’s going to be by far the better senator. He’s honest, he’s hard-working, he’s smart.â€
That’s all Burns has left folks. “You like Max because he is a good guy, so vote for me. I think that Tester should take Maxes radio message to the TV:
“You might have heard ads from Conrad Burns using my name. Well, let me be very clear: I support Jon Tester. I believe in Jon because he is a straight shooter, a real Montanan and just a good guy.â€
| Comments (14) | Permanent Link | Categories: '06, Conrad Burns, democrats, dickhead, elections, montana, political |
10/25/2006
Conrad Burns: Kicked Back, With His Mind on His Money and His Money and His Mind
by Matt Singer on 9:39 am.
This morning’s Missoulian:
A new accounting review shows, among other things, the organization’s chief executive received three different salaries at the same time. And one of the company’s former employees said in a Missoulian interview that staff members were expected to contribute to Burns’ re-election campaign.
Multiple salaries? Expectations to send money back to Burns?
Why that all sounds corrupt as Hell to me. This whole expectation of feudal loyalty smacks of Resodyn buying debate seats and guaranteeing them for Burns’ supporters.
Can we rename Burns’ office Tamany Hall?
As another note, I have no real idea whether there was ever an explicit agreement between George Bailey and Burns or Burns’ staff to kickback these federal appropriations to Burns’ reelection campaign. I do know that a man, who when discussing federal appropriations would howl, “That’s my money. My outpatient clinics,” is a man who has so thoroughly lost touch with reality and all sense of decency that demanding favors in exchange for how he uses his power to earmark our money certainly isn’t outside the realm of possibility.
It’s his money after all. It belongs in his campaign coffers.
Also worth noting, Lee Newspapers is doing an analysis of whether Burns really is bringing major money into the state (notably, all of the Lee papers are running this Burns story, only the Missoulian appears to be reporting on the INSA corruption developments). They singled out Burns’ Butte claims and found that he does bring money to the state. They also found that some of the money Burns claims he brought to Montana went elsewhere, that former staffers of his turned lobbyists had a hand in much of it (can we all say “revolving door” together?), and 80% of the money Burns is claiming he secured was also requested by Baucus, so it’s tough to give exclusive credit.
Notably, Burns is doing these things when these companies hire his former staff as lobbyists. I’ve written it before, but it appears I’ll have to write it again. I’m not really sure how much Burns is a part of this, but it appears some Republicans long ago figured out a game: find a dumb man on the appropriations committee, work for him for several years and line up approps for his former staffers turned lobbyists, when you leave to start your lobbying career just find a replacement who will do the same for you. Make it easier the Senator’s new staff by mostly finding your clients in the Senator’s home state. Then, charge Montanans high prices for access to their own Senator. That’s a damn good way to make a living.
In fact, it’d be about $20 million they’ve made via our Senator, their former boss.
Tamany Hall
| Comments (8) | Permanent Link | Categories: Conrad Burns, Front Page, corrupt, dickhead |
10/23/2006
Burns: Part of the Ministry of Truth?
by Shane Mason on 6:33 pm.
Enough Said? Maybe not.
Need some insight?
| Comments (18) | Permanent Link | Categories: '06, Conrad Burns, dickhead, elections, political |
10/17/2006
Why Not Censor Both Sides?
by Shane Mason on 2:12 pm.
According to a Helena IR article brought up by a commenter, local station across Montana are pulling a commercial produced by the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee because of inaccuracies in the ad. The article did not mind letting Eric Iverson spout his vitriolic sentiments:
“It’s like Jon Tester and his liberal thug friends have been lying about Conrad and his family for over a year now,” Erik Iverson, senior adviser to the Burns’ campaign. “This is a desperate ad that was designed to help a desperate, faltering candidate. Montana TV stations realized the ad for what it is - a lie.”
If the ad contains lies, it should be changed. However, what is good for the goose is good for the gander. Of course, no one is pulling any of Burns’s out and out lying ads. Look at the infamous patriot act ad. Full of lies and half truths about both Jon Testers position and the act itself.
While the Tester campaign can not comment on third party ads, Phil Singer, the spokesman for the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, does point out why the ad might be accurate:
“Senator Burns can hire as many D.C. lawyers as he likes to gloss over his record but he can’t change the basic fact that he voted for this legislation which cut Byrne grants and other programs that help fight meth,” Singer said. “Instead of hiding behind his lawyers and playing politics, Senator Burns should stop standing in the way of law enforcement’s efforts to combat the spread of this drug.”
| Comments (11) | Permanent Link | Categories: '06, Conrad Burns, democrats, dickhead, elections, montana, overreach, political, republicans |
10/14/2006
A Really Dangerous Man
by Shane Mason on 11:48 pm.
A commenter yesterday reminded me of a man who, were he not marginalized, would be one of the most dangerous men in the state. Rick Jore is running for House District 12 again under the Constitution Party. He once held this position as a republican, before he decided they were not extreme enough for him. I wont spend a lot of time telling you about what makes him such a bad man, I’ll let him do that for me.
From his website
I will oppose all federal funds appropriated for education.
Just as I opposed CHIP (Children’s Health Insurance Program) in the 1999 legislature, I will continue to oppose similar programs.
I will not support legislation to fund any scheme that is labeled “economic development.” I opposed all of the “jobs and income” proposals in the last session and I will continue to do so.
Yes, you read it right. Rick Jore opposes federal funding for education, health insurance for underprivileged children and economic development programs for Montana. So, let’s look at this in more detail by examining his answers to the Project Vote Smart questionnaire:
- Rick Jore would greatly decrease funding for higher education
- Rick Jore would greatly decrease funding for high schools
- Rick Jore would greatly decrease funding for elementary schools
- Rick Jore would greatly decrease funding for the environment
- Rick Jore would decrease funding for law enforcement
- Rick Jore would decrease funding for highways
- Rick Jore would eliminate funding for health care
- Rick Jore would eliminate funding for welfare
- Rick Jore does not support any type of campaign finance controls
- Rick Jore does not support programs to provide prison inmates with vocational and job-related skills
- Rick Jore does increasing state funding for community centers and other social agencies in areas with at-risk youth
- Rick Jore does not support increasing state funding for state and local emergency agencies to prevent or respond to terrorism
- Rick Jore does not support increasing state funding for state and local emergency agencies to prevent or respond to terrorism
- Rick Jore does not support the restriction of the sale of products used to make methamphetamine
- Rick Jore does not support the Montana Meth Project and similar initiatives
- Rick Jore does not promote increased use of alternative fuel technology
Seriously, this stuff goes on and on. What can you do to help? Support Jeanne Windham in her bid for reelection to HD 12. Donate to the Montana Legislative Campaign Committee through the Act Blue link above. Contact the state democratic party of Jeanne Windham to see what you can do to help.
| Comments (31) | Permanent Link | Categories: '08, ballot initiatives, democrats, dickhead, ideologues, punitive |
10/13/2006
I was there
by Shane Mason on 1:45 am.
Hello all. I was indeed at the Helena debate tonight. However, the airport’s wireless did not seem to work on my laptop, so you get second run stuff here. First off, read Moorcat’s take on the Bozeman debate earlier in the week. It is rather good, but I am a biased fan of Moorecat’s writing and views. Partly because the disenfranchised republican is one of the great thing we have going for us this year. Now, let’s look at tonight debate. I will not read Pogies coverage of it before I give you my own, mainly because Don and Jason are so insightful that I might lose my own opinion in there. My beautiful wife and I attended the debate with Craig, who came as an independent viewer.
First off: why the airport? It was hot and crowded and flat. Debates should be held in slanted floor theaters like the Hamilton debate was. The civic center would have been a much better forum.
Second: though all the debates were lopsided with Tester supporters, this was even more so. I would claim 5 to 1. My beautiful wife says higher. There was a sea of yellow tee-shirts thanks to the Fire-Burns people. My beautiful wife asked me what I thought Burns saw when he looked out into the audience. I said the wild-eyed liberals that Bush portrayed in his 2004 commercials. She said that he saw the sames yellow shirts at every debate so he had no idea that he was looking at Montana. These yellow shirts are the face of a state that is pissed and he doesn’t even get it.
Third: man these were tough questions. Whereas all other debates the questions seemed as though they were set up by the campaigns, these seemed like each were set up by the opposing campaign. Much better than lobbing soft balls, these tough questions really caused the debaters to pull out the truth.
Fourth: man oh man, Burns is a shameless liar. Over and over again I heard it. Embryonic stem cell research has led to no results? Neither has ‘the cure for cancer’, should we stop trying to find one? The simple fact is that you have to build a foundation of knowledge first. That foundation leads to results. Burying your head in the sand only leads to ears full of sand.
Fifth: Burns wants to start a nuclear war. Seriously, this sort of logic is crazy. Burns said that we could stand North Korea and Iran down because we still have nuclear warhead buried in the ground. No! He really said that! What’s more, he said that we should threaten sanctions on China if they did no deal with North Korea for us. Tester, on the other hand, claimed that WE SHOULD BE THE LEADERS. We should work with China and our allies to come terms with North Korea. Seriously, sanction China if they don’t deal with Korea? Does he have sand in his ears or did he put earplugs in before he stuck his head down there?
Sixth: Explain the rules maybe? How come Jon Tester had not heard about the ‘ask your opponent a question’ but Burns read his from an index card? Perhaps this was a ‘prepping issue’ or perhaps the fact that the moderator is a clear republican plays in?
Seventh: What a nice question: Can you say something nice about your opponent? Tester points out that Burns has made a sacrifice to serve 18 years for his state and country. Burns? Lies again and takes the opportunity to again use the word ‘liberal’ as a dirty word. This is not the way a Montanan is supposed to act. First, he can’t remember Paul Wellstone’s name, he calls him ‘John’ Wellstone. The audience has to remind him that it is indeed Paul Wellstone. Then he claims to have been great friends with him, but uses the question to paint Tester as an ‘extreme’ liberal. Is that Montanan’s style or is that how they work in DC?
You know, Tester won this debate. I don’t care if Coobs comes on here and says it was a toss up or not. You had Burns on one side stuttering and tripping over himself. On the other side, you had Tester sure of his words and with the support of the audience. Only November will tell for sure, but I will say that had I NEVER heard of neither, I would still have given this one to Tester, BIG TIME!
Now, I will read Intelligent Discontent’s coverage and comment there. Please go over there and read it, you always should. Looks like they have two parts. It is always the best debate coverage in Montana. Look into Moorecat’s future coverage of tonights debate as well, his take is ALWAYS worth hearing.
I will note, before I go, that I attended a fundraiser afterwords. I have nothing new to add that I did not say here. John Tester is a real person and he cares about what he is doing: working for us.
| Comments (48) | Permanent Link | Categories: '06, Conrad Burns, dickhead, elections, montana, political |
10/7/2006
Burns Flip Flops on Public Access
by Shane Mason on 1:40 am.
Many of you might remember when Burn’s struck a blow against access to public lands in order to help out a rich buddy. Rancher Mac White wanted to build a road across public lands so that he could access his private lands. The problem is, he didn’t want to allow the road to be used for public access to the public lands it crossed. The forest service has a notion of reciprocity (essentially “We grant you access to your land and you grant us access to our public land”) So, the ranch owner hired a lobbyist and Burn’s stepped in on his buddies side.
Then Sen. Conrad Burns included an item in an appropriation bill from his Senate committee directing the chief of the Forest Service to accept administrative access only on the Big Elk Canyon proposed road, whereby only Forest Service employees on official business could use the road - not the public.
Is this an abuse of power or what? Well, now it looks like he is flip flopping on that position:
HELENA — Sen. Conrad Burns may ax a provision he added to a bill earlier this year that allows a friend and campaign contributor to build a private road across public lands near the Crazy Mountains — a move that angered some because it did not create equal public access to nearby public lands.
He now claims that this language was just inserted as a placeholder while the parties worked out their differences on the issue.
The announcement came as news to both local Forest Service officials who handled the earlier negotiations, and the state’s largest hunting and fishing group, which opposed Burns’ provision.
The Montana Wildlife Federation has not been contacted by Burn’s office to be part of the discussion, said executive director Craig Sharpe.
Doesn’t look like he is trying to see the differences worked out. Why would he have added the language in the first place? Why choose a single rich buddy over the public of Montana?
White has long been a campaign contributor to Republicans, including Burns. Records show White has donated $2,050 to Burns since at least 1994. His most recent donation came on May 30 this year, about a month before a committee of which Burns serves as chairman released a copy of the bill that included the provision for White’s road.
Now that he is trailing in the polls, he suddenly cares about public access? I’ld say not so much. We need a senator who will look out for our interest all six years, not just the month before the election. Jon Tester is the clear choice for those of us who think that public access to public land is important.
Thanks to Jennifer McKee for writing such an insightful piece on this.
| Comments (14) | Permanent Link | Categories: Conrad Burns, corrupt, dickhead, political, republicans |
9/27/2006
October: Surprisingly Bad Ads
by V on 7:22 pm.
If this ad is a taste of what is to come from the Republicans this October, paint me unconcerned.
I am also going to take this opportunity to second Jon Tester’s serious (thank you The Onion) call for Conrad Burns to drop out of this race. It has gone past the point where he is only embarassing himself.
| Comments (2) | Permanent Link | Categories: '06, Conrad Burns, Front Page, dickhead |
9/24/2006
Burns Under Investigation; Add Another Charge
by Matt Singer on 10:19 pm.
From the Washington Post:
Iverson announced that the senator’s criminal lawyer had confirmed with the Justice Department that “Burns is in fact not the target” of its investigation.But what exactly does that mean?
Not much, said Stanley M. Brand, a lawyer in Washington with decades of experience in defending prominent officials charged with corruption. He represented former White House aide George Stephanopoulos in the Whitewater investigation and former representative Dan Rostenkowski, the Illinois Democrat who pleaded guilty to mail fraud in 1996.
Brand said that distinctions in a federal criminal manual between a “target,” someone the Justice Department has decided to seek charges against, and a “subject,” someone under investigation who could be upgraded to a target, are largely meaningless in a practical sense.
“You can’t take these distinctions to the bank, because the Justice Department can change your status whenever it wants to,” Brand said. “To me, it is academic. Burns is under investigation.”
And it seems like he should be under investigation for more.
The debate in Butte was co-sponsored by a Butte company named Resodyn. Shane has pointed out below how Resodyn used their co-sponsor position to help the Burns campaigns. More noteworthy, according to an email from a Butte correspondent, the Resodyn offices used to have giant Burns signs, which came down in the days just before the debate, as Resodyn’s role as a host became clear.
As Gwen Florio reports, Burns has delivered federal earmarks for Burns and the company responded by providing a majority of his support at the debate:
Burns highlighted his history of bringing federal money to Butte; indeed, the debate was co-sponsored by the Resodyn Corp., the beneficiary of some of that federal largesse. When Burns was introduced, those in the roughly 60 seats reserved for Resodyn employees comprised the majority of those who stood and applauded him.
According to state records, Resodyn is a corporation. Corporations are prohibited by law from providing electoral assistance. I’m damn curious to know whether Resodyn reserved those seats for people on staff who were pro-Burns, ’cause it certainly appears that way.
Hell, we already know Burns’ operation is corrupt, so it’s hardly news that he’d deliver earmarks to someone in exchange for big donations and astroturf support, but this may have crossed the illegal line again.
Furthermore, Lee Newspapers association with this is an embarassment. For the Montana Standard, which co-sponsored this event to still be critiquing citizens who attended the Hamilton debate when they participated in a fraud to stack the front of the room with Burns supporters is an embarassment. If Chuck Johnson, Mike Dennison, and Jennifer McKee don’t cover this conflict of interest, it’ll be pretty apparent that Lee corporate is telling Lee news how to operate.
What a joke.
Update — Check the comments below and the posts over at Big Sky Democrats, sources are saying that Resodyn ousted non-Burns supporters and gave seats to non-employees who were Burns supporters. That makes this appear to definitely be a corporation helping a candidate. That’s what we call a violation of federal law. Of course, the Montana Standard is implicated for either their own faults or their own inanity at letting Resodyn co-sponsor in the first place. My guess is they won’t break the story.
| Comments (6) | Permanent Link | Categories: '06, Conrad Burns, Front Page, dickhead, elections |
9/23/2006
Resodyn Buys Debate For Burns?
by Shane Mason on 10:09 pm.
Several folks who attended the debate in Butte tonight mentioned that the front rows were reserved by a company named Resodyn that co-sponsored the debate. A commenter here said
I attended the debate. Interesting seating fact. Three or four rows down front were reserved for Burns backers. They got this seating to make it look, to cameras, that there were more of them there than there actually were.
It is not clear how you got one of these seats up front, but it is clear that they were almost exclusively occupied by Burn’s supporters. Hmm. Jay noted this:
Interesting note: The Resodyn Corporation — a Burns sponsor — is in part paying for the venue. They had a whole bunch of seats saved, all of them filled with Burns’ supporters. Without these seats, Burns’ supporters would probably be pushed to the back.
So, is there a connection here? Let’s see what two minutes with Google tells us:
Research for Combat Wound Treatment (Butte) – This project has been secured by Senator Burns and approved by the Senate to receive $6 million in federal funding to research three different technologies to help treat combat wounds in the field. This money will fund adult stem cell research and new approaches to heal wounds more quickly and re-grow tissue and bone. This research is critical to help rehabilitate our veterans returning from Iraq and Afghanistan with serious injuries. (Local contact: Larry Farrar, Resodyn, 406-497-5252)
Thermal Sprays for Polymeric-Based Mitigation Materials (Butte) – This project has been secured by Senator Burns and approved by the Senate to receive $4 million in federal funding to develop these spray-on chemicals which will help military vehicles absorb explosive blasts. (Local contact: Larry Farrar, Resodyn, 406-497-5252)
What? About 10 million secured By Conrad Burns that will directly benefit Resodyn? Wow. And some of it for adult stem cell research? Burn’s voted against funding for embryonic stem cell research, didn’t he? Wonder why? Now, it looks like Resodyn is sponsoring debates and stacking the front rows with Burns supporters? Hmm.
Here are some other facts worth noting: Resodyn Corp’s director, Jeffrey C Barrow is one of Conrad Burn’s top donators with over $4200 this year. Guess who is next on the list of top donors? Starr B Barrow, with $4200 from the same zip code. His wife? According to Open Secrets, this is the only sizable political contribution these folks have ever made. Man, Burns comes cheap.
Update 0:
This just keeps getting better and better. Lawrence Farrar, President of the Resodyn Corporation (see the ‘contact’ above) has made a few donations of his own:
$10,000 to the Montana Republican State Central Cmte
$8,080 to the Montana Republican State Central Cmte
These donations were on 12/30/2005 and 1/17/2006 respectivly. 18 days apart on the turn of the new year? Hmm. This starts to smell fishier… I hope that the fine media here picks up on this, something is really wrong here if they don’t.
| Comments (33) | Permanent Link | Categories: '06, Conrad Burns, dickhead, elections, political |
9/22/2006
The Republican Party is Full of Poop
by Matt Singer on 8:56 am.
This is rich. The Montana Republican Party actually has the audacity to attack Tester for voting against an unnecessary bill limiting pornography access at libraries (local libraries had already solved the problem). In fact, the bill was so unnecessary that Chuck Johnson notes that 60% of Republican Senators voted against it that session, including then-Senate President Tom Beck. Gwen Florio notes in her article that the state law also would have simply duplicated federal standards. In other words, experts, Republicans, and Democrats agreed. But it’s now fodder for attacking Tester.
To understand how audacious this really is, though, you have to hear about a bill that a majority of Senate Republicans opposed in the 2005 Legislature, a move that earns them status in the Punish the Rape Victim Caucus.
The bill, HB 520, is explained briefly in this post:
And, let me just say that while I’m on the topic, people should take note of Rep. Kevin Furey’s Minor in Possession legislation. A young woman was raped while drunk at a party last year in Lake County. When she reported the rape (and her own drunken state), she was issued a citation for Minor in Possession, providing yet another concern for young women who want to come forward. Virtually anyone who partied in college also knows about people who either got beat up or needed medical attention while illegally intoxicated. This bill would protect these people from getting cited based on statements they make while seeking medical attention or reporting sexual crimes. It would also protect friends helping them out.
This was good legislation and my friend Kevin Furey (to whom you can donate through ActBlue) deserves commendation for introducing it.
But more notable is that 35 of 73 Republicans opposed the bill, including a majority of Republican Senators and such Republican leaders as Roy Brown (Bob Keenan, to his credit, voted for the bill).
Which do you think is worse in terms of stopping child predators? Duplicative legislation to crack down on ponography? Or a bill to make sure that teenage rape victims who were intoxicated at the time of their assaults aren’t punished for reporting the crimes?
Somehow, I think stopping the punishment for the victims is key.
And make no mistake, the Republicans who voted against this bill wanted to punish the victims because they didn’t want to send a signal to underage drinkers that their crime can be forgiven. Some of us haven’t so completely had our moral compasses erode to the point where we think that sexual predators and teenagers playing with alcohol are on similar ethical planes.
There’s a special place in Hell reserved for people who do this.
| Comments (14) | Permanent Link | Categories: Front Page, dickhead, republicans |
9/20/2006
And the Firefighter Comments are Back
by Matt Singer on 1:09 pm.
In a new ad: (more…)
| Comments (25) | Permanent Link | Categories: '06, Conrad Burns, Front Page, dickhead, elections, montana |
9/15/2006
There Is A Spoon
by Matt Singer on 9:58 pm.
Quick note to fans of The Matrix — it was an interesting movie until it nosedived in the third installment. Still, it was a movie. There is a spoon. We can’t stop bullets with our minds. There is a reality. We don’t always have a God’s eye view of it. We don’t completely comprehend it. But even if we don’t understand it, it’s there.
Now, can someone please tell Erik Iverson this? In a TIME magazine article about the federal investigation that has just resulted in guilty plea from Bob Ney and that reportedly has Senator Conrad Burns in its sights, Iverson responds gamely, “There is no federal investigation.”
Hey, buddy, that federal investigation has snared Abramoff, a number of his associates, some Congressional aides, and a Congressman. You can deny its existence if you want. Similarly, I can simply declare that AIDS doesn’t exist. Of course, doing such would make me a complete lunatic. You, on the other hand, are now the senior advisor to a U.S. Senate campaign and just got quoted spouting ridiculous drivel. This, of course, is the difference between health care and political reporting.
Iverson went on to declare that “This is all just politics.” What is, Erik? The bribery? The placement of your wife on the payroll of INSA? Your denial of the existence of an investigation that has netted several guilty pleas? What is all just politics? The accusation that it is criminal to sell a U.S. Senate office to the highest bidder?
You can keep trying to convince me that Bush Justice Department is playing politics by leaking news that your boy is under scrutiny. I don’t buy it. Burns is under scrutiny because the corruption in his office was obvious. He sold out his country on the Marianas. He sold out Iraq on the Telecoms. And he undermined our entire republic for a pittance. And if he didn’t know what he was doing, he’s too damn stupid to be called Senator.
As Matt Taibbi wrote in the Rolling Stone feature story that was accompanied by the tale of how you considered drilling in the Grand Canyon after he pitched it to you at a fundraiser:
In the Third World, corrupt politicians at least get something for selling out the people — boats, mansions, villas in the south of France. If you offered the lowest, most drunken ex-mobster in the Russian Duma $5,000, $10,000, $15,000 in soft money for his vote, he would laugh in your face; he might even be insulted enough to shoot you. But Jack Abramoff apparently got any number of congressmen to play ball for the same kind of money.
Your office, Senator, isn’t just an embarassment to the state and country I love. It’s an embarassment to corruption.
| Comments (13) | Permanent Link | Categories: Conrad Burns, Front Page, dickhead |
Burns: Bringing a Whole New Meaning to the Word Accomplished
by Matt Singer on 3:38 pm.
A very, very false meaning.
Burns is apparently claiming to have co-sponsored an amendment that he didn’t co-sponsor.
This is reminiscent of how he previously “secured” funding by merely proposing it.
In the future of Burns’ dreams, governance will be by dream and words will no longer have any meanings. And kittens and puppies will play together on gumdrop rainbows.
And now back to reality…
| Comments (1) | Permanent Link | Categories: Conrad Burns, Front Page, dickhead |
9/10/2006
Thoughts on the Debate Today
by Shane Mason on 10:51 pm.
I wont attempt to ‘cover’ the issues of the debate because Pogie and Jason over at intelligent Discontent have done such an excellent job. Here is Part 1 of Pogie’s coverage and analysis. Here is streaming audio from Jason. Good work guys. What I want to talk about is the atmosphere in the room and how I felt about being there.
The day started when the wife and I picked up CeCe and Jay at Jay’s in Missoula for the Blogger’s Unity Tour 2006. The tour lasted until we got to the debate in Hamilton where Jay ditched us to pose up front for the NOW camera. It will be interesting to watch NOW’s take on the debate and the energy there. In the audience we met up with a frequent reader of this site (jhygirl I think). It is always nice to meet the people behind the comments.
Believe me when I say this, there was an absolute fervor in the room. I estimate that the Tester supporters outnumbered the Burn’s supporters 3 to 1 and they were fired up. Listening to the audio stream at ID, the level of support doesn’t really come across like it did in the room. It was amazing and invigorating to witness. Another thing that doesn’t come across in the audio stream is one of the things that you will likely be reading and hearing about the debate in the coming days is the crowds feeling for Burns. According to this lackluster piece at New West
The debate lasted nearly 90 minutes and perhaps gave the voters a clearer view of where each candidate stood. The majority of the crowd was obviously Tester supporters. However, Burns supporters cheered their candidate and refrained from the jeering and booing that marred an otherwise healthy and lively discussion.
That wasn’t how I saw it at all. What I saw was the people of the state of Montana holding their representative accountable when he lied and mis-characterized fact, which happened frequently. Tester was strong and his supporters were there for him. Burn’s supporters almost tried to fight back, but it was hard for the 12 of them to make much of an impact.
The greatest thing that I took from the debate was a renewed trust in the idea that Tester has the strength and integrity to lead Montana. We must take this energy and continue pushing it into November.
Update 0:
In this mini-filing it is reported:
Afterward, Burns’ wife, Phyllis, confronted Tester and called some of his remarks concerning her husband, “unreal.â€
No, they were real and they were true. I was there, I heard them.
Update 1
Pogie has Part 2 and Part 3 up now. You should read these, he is doing a great job.
Update 2:
CeCe has posted a most excellent blow-by-blow Read it. Now. Go!
| Comments (8) | Permanent Link | Categories: '06, Conrad Burns, dickhead, elections, montana |
