Skip to main content

We Are All Murthas Now


This is the year when many shameless congressional Democrats became U.S. Rep. John Murtha, the powerful Chairman of the House Appropriations Defense Committee and dispenser-in-chief of goodies. Any superfluous submarines that have come Connecticut’s way in the dying last days of the Bush administration have Murtha’s fingerprints all over them.

Rep. John Larson of Connecticut’s impregnable 1st District was a pioneer in this regard. Way back in April, the Journal Inquirer reported in a flashy first page story that Larson had struck up a very close friendship with the earmark king of Pennsylvania, then under scrutiny for the second time by the FBI.

The first time, FBI agents attempted to ensnare Murtha in a tit for tat scam involving wealthy Arab sheiks, FBI plants in disguise. One of the sheiks brought a briefcase full of cash with him, passed its fragrance under Murtha’s nose and begged favors of him.

Murtha suggested the money be laundered through his favorite charity, a constituent who had asked if Murtha could help him in the launching of a start-up business enterprise. The FBI did not get their man this time, but the resulting ABSCAM scandal – all caught on tape -- proved embarrassing to the earmark king.

Much later Murtha would best be known for his strenuous opposition to President George Bush’s “war of choice” in Iraq. Murtha abandoned his principled opposition once it had become fairly certain, very late in the day, that General David Petraeus’ strategy was succeeding. In war and business, nothing succeeds like success. Copying Murtha’s feint, Dodd asserted in a Providence Journal report way back in March, 2007 that he had no difficulty in declaring that he “would be moving our troops out of urban areas tonight.” Dodd called his earlier 2002 vote to authorize Bush’s war of choice “a mistake” and quipped according to the report, “I’m Catholic; I’ve been to confession.”

Someone once asked Murtha about earmarks, globules of tax money furtively inserted into bills to reward friendly legislators or to persuade reluctant legislative comrades to swallow an unpalatable piece of legislation they swore would never go down their gullet without a manful struggle. Weren’t these earmarks indisputable signs that the givers and takers were somewhat, you know, corrupt? Murtha looked at the naïf asking the question as if he had just arrived from Mars and said something to the effect that this was the time honored way in Congress of purchasing loyalty. Without bought legislators, political business simply could not go forward at all.

When Sen. Ben Nelson of Nebraska was deflected from his ‘principled’ non-support of a health care bill that, it was plausibly argued, would force religious objectors to finance abortions through their taxes, Nelson was bought off with a generous bribe from President Barack Obama's Chocago mob: No more forever would “cornhuskers” have to pay for the additional Medicaid spending imposed on Nebraska by the bill. Dodd was put very much in the running for a multi-million dollar gift that had the words “UConn Health Center” penciled in on it, a bonbon from a grateful administration for Dodd’s support in fashioning a bill that when fully perfected, some argued, would unfavorably impact jobs in his home state, once known as “the insurance capitol of the world,” now a shadow of its former self.

No submarines were exchanged for votes this time.

On the way home from the Beltway money making machine to celebrate Christmas with his family, Dodd was accosted by one of his constituents at Bradley who taunted him in passing, “Enjoy it while you can. You’re not going to get re-elected,” very possibly a grass roots tea bag patriot or a voter peeved that the greatest deliberative body in the world had just passed a largely unread bill on a partisan vote.’

Dodd snickered, “Merry Christmas” to the grouch. The senator was in a getting and giving mood, determined not to let dyspeptic spirits haunt his Holiday.

“My job,” Dodd said, “is to do what I can on behalf of my state,” I’ve tried to do it in a balanced way… Instead of applauding the fact we're getting something done for our state, they seem to be annoyed.”

In heaven, the redoubtable George Washington Plunkitt of Tammany Hall is chortling, “Spoken like a true Murtha clone.”


Comments

mccommas said…
I find it incredable that they would bribe someone whose vote they already had!

Popular posts from this blog

The Blumenthal Burisma Connection

Steve Hilton , a Fox News commentator who over the weekend had connected some Burisma corruption dots, had this to say about Connecticut U.S. Senator Dick Blumenthal’s association with the tangled knot of corruption in Ukraine: “We cross-referenced the Senate co-sponsors of Ed Markey's Ukraine gas bill with the list of Democrats whom Burisma lobbyist, David Leiter, routinely gave money to and found another one -- one of the most sanctimonious of them all, actually -- Sen. Richard Blumenthal."

Taking The Fifth, After Esty

Whether or not U.S. Representative Elizabeth Esty will serve the remainder of her term or resign immediately is very much an open question. But, in any case, the battle for Connecticut’s 5 th U.S. Congressional District has begun with a show of unexpected fireworks. For many years, the 5 th District was a toss-up proposition; both Republicans and Democrats have held and surrendered the seat. Geographically the 5 th District touches the border of New York from Connecticut’s northern-most point to Danbury in the southern quadrant and includes much of Litchfield county and parts of Fairfield, Hartford and New Haven counties. Party affiliation is competitive, in round figures, 30 percent Democrat, 25 percent Republican and 45 percent unaffiliated. Over the years, the Democrat Party in Connecticut has moved from the center to the left, but the 5 th District has been a moderate preserve. During the Obama presidential election, Republican moderates within Connecticut's U.S. ...

PCBs, GOOD FOR YOUR HEALTH

By Gerald and Natalie Sirkin c2007 A front-page story on PCBs in the March 9 News-Times is just wrong. The first thing to know about PCBs is that they never killed a single person nor did they ever cause cancer. The second is that although they are invariably called “cancer-causing,” that designation comes chiefly from a single rat study. The third thing is that the subject rats were exposed daily for 21 months to 100 parts per million (ppm) of PCBs containing 60% chlorine. (The 100 ppm was about 5,000 times the tolerable daily intake of PCBs set by FDA in 1973.) When rats were exposed to PCBs containing less chlorine, they developed no cancers. The fourth, that when the exposed rats were allowed to live out their lives, they had fewer cancers and lived longer than the unexposed rats. PCBs is a family of chemicals known as polychlorinated biphenyls. PCBs contain chlorine ranging from 12% to 70%. They were used in two General Electric plants that manufactured electrical equipmen...