home

Coincidence or Scandal?

By TChris, Section Other Politics
Posted on Fri Feb 17, 2006 at 07:13:47 AM EST
Tags: (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

by TChris

Six clients of lobbyist Michael Herson received $50 million over four years after Sen. Arlen Specter inserted "earmarks" into military appropriations bills that benefited those clients. Herson, it turns out, is married to Vicki Siegel Herson, who served until recently as Specter's legislative assistant on the Appropriations Committee. Coincidence?

< Should Doctors Assist Executions? | Iraqi Death Squads: 'We'll Look Into It' >

  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    Coincidence or Scandal? | 9 comments (9 topical)
    Re: Coincidence or Scandal? (none / 0) (#1)
    by desertswine on Fri Feb 17, 2006 at 07:29:51 AM EST
    I vote "scandal."

    Re: Coincidence or Scandal? (none / 0) (#2)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Fri Feb 17, 2006 at 09:33:31 AM EST
    Coincidence? Not bloody likely! Hopefully, this is just the tip of the iceberg and all of the cases of people who have directly benefitted from earmarks inserted by politicians they are buddy-buddy with, or related to, will be coming out inthe coming weeks.

    Re: Coincidence or Scandal? (none / 0) (#3)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Fri Feb 17, 2006 at 09:41:39 AM EST
    Is this the sort of thing the line-item veto could help avoid?

    Re: Coincidence or Scandal? (none / 0) (#4)
    by scarshapedstar on Fri Feb 17, 2006 at 09:59:41 AM EST
    Is this the sort of thing the line-item veto could help avoid?
    Yeah, I'm sure Bush is just dying to stick it to Arlen Specter.

    Re: Coincidence or Scandal? (none / 0) (#5)
    by scarshapedstar on Fri Feb 17, 2006 at 10:03:06 AM EST
    Seriously, the notion that the party controlling the Presidency, House and Senate needs extra executive powers to amend a bill... did you ever take civics, SUO? Or do you honestly expect us to believe that in the Party of Rove the right hand has no idea what the left hand is doing?

    Re: Coincidence or Scandal? (none / 0) (#6)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Fri Feb 17, 2006 at 10:16:12 AM EST
    scar, seriously, you're way off base. It really was a non-partisan question, unless you are conceding that the Republicans will be in power forever.

    Re: Coincidence or Scandal? (none / 0) (#7)
    by Johnny on Fri Feb 17, 2006 at 10:55:52 AM EST
    It was a good question sarc. I for one believe that the line-item veto is a crock. If the prez does not like the bill, only parts of it, send it back to congress until he gets a version he likes or they over-ride his veto.

    Re: Coincidence or Scandal? (none / 0) (#8)
    by Lora on Sat Feb 18, 2006 at 10:18:41 AM EST
    Specter made a strong defense in the linked article. If there is wrongdoing here, what about the other 99 senators? I'm betting you wouldn't have to scratch very far to find worse (*cough* Abramoff *cough*). As phi suggested in the Feingold thread, this smells of the Repressive Right Smear Machine. Specter hasn't been following the party line lately. "It starts when you're always afraid / Step out of line, the man come to take you away" --Stephen Stills.

    Re: Coincidence or Scandal? (none / 0) (#9)
    by scarshapedstar on Sun Feb 19, 2006 at 06:52:00 AM EST
    scar, seriously, you're way off base. It really was a non-partisan question, unless you are conceding that the Republicans will be in power forever.
    Well, I'm still baffled as to how the line-item veto would have been helpful here. The Republican congress has absolutely no shame and probably would have overridden the veto, not that Bush would care to make this the first veto since he's been in office since that's hard work and there's brush to clear. But I guess you're referring to if we had a divided government that at least paid lip service to separation of powers. Hey, if you want it, vote for it...

    Coincidence or Scandal? | 9 comments (9 topical)