Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Can anyone explain why Murtha is against campaign reform?

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU
 
The Backlash Cometh Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-16-06 09:31 AM
Original message
Can anyone explain why Murtha is against campaign reform?
I've read about his alledged ethical problems and how he was opposed to the new rules regarding gifts from lobbyists, and as far as I can see, his only redeeming value is that he probably is the best guy to help get us out of Iraq. However, is he carrying baggage or a hidden agenda that might present a problem down the road? In other words, is he an old guard Dem?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
thereismore Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-16-06 09:38 AM
Response to Original message
1. is he against campaign reform? I cannot believe it. That would suck. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Backlash Cometh Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-16-06 09:42 AM
Response to Reply #1
4. I'm just trying to sort this out myself.
I'm not even sure if it's called campaign reform. What Pelosi is doing seems to go further to put a quick stop to the corruption problems we have.

But here is the article that I read that piqued my curiousity:

One conservative Democrat said that a Murtha-Pelosi ally approached him on the House floor and said pointedly: "I hope you like your committee assignment, because it's the only one you're going to get."

In a phone call initiated by Murtha that same day, the lawmaker told the longtime politician that he had already signed a letter of support for Hoyer. The congressman said he was stunned when Murtha told him, "Letters don't mean anything."

and

Murtha, the ranking Democrat on the powerful Appropriations defense subcommittee, has been dogged by allegations that he has skirted ethical boundaries and has thwarted efforts to tighten rules on lobbying. Those questions were amplified yesterday after at least three attendees at the Tuesday-night meeting of Blue Dog lawmakers complained that Murtha had disparaged the Democrats' ethics and lobbying package.

"He said, 'You know, I believe it's total crap, but Nancy supports it, and I'm going to push it,' " said a senior Blue Dog Democrat and Hoyer supporter, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because he was divulging comments from a closed-door meeting.



http://www.rawstory.com/showarticle.php?src=http%3A%2F%...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
aintitfunny Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-16-06 09:57 AM
Response to Reply #4
19. He clarified, in no uncertain terms, "Crap"
refers to there are more important items on the agenda, i.e. War. That is his focus and he thinks it is "Crap" wasting time. I am not expressing agreement or disagreement, just pointing out his response as detailed in his interview with Chris Matthews. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15737141/page/2 / and here are some pertinet snippets from the transcript":

"MURTHA: Let me tell you, I agree that we have to return a perception of honesty to the Congress. I agree with what Nancys trying to do. The crap Im talking about is the crap that people have violated the law, the crap that the kind of things that have happened with Abramoff, the kind of things that have happened with some of the members

MATTHEWS: But thats not what you said. Didnt you say it was total crap, what she was proposing?

MURTHA: What I said was, its total crap, the idea we have to deal with an issue like this, whenand it is total crap that we have to deal with an issue like this when weve got a war going on and we got all these other issues -- $8 billion a month were spending"

I, personally, am good with Hoyer or Murtha, BOTH are good guys, BOTH would serve our party. I am not thrilled with the infighting.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Backlash Cometh Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-16-06 10:06 AM
Response to Reply #19
26. As sad as it sounds, Corruption is an issue as important as the
Iraq War. He needs to make it understood by giving it his full support.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pnwmom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-16-06 10:30 AM
Response to Reply #26
37. I'm not so sure. The Iraq war seems more important to me.
Both in terms of lives lost and money.

But there's no reason we can't address both.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Backlash Cometh Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-16-06 10:53 AM
Response to Reply #37
39. We are IN the Iraq war BECAUSE of corruption.
As long as the powers that be can be cajoled with money to follow a disastrous policy, we, and the rest of the world, are in danger.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pnwmom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-16-06 03:06 PM
Response to Reply #39
52. We're in the war because people like Bush and Powell lied
and members of Congress either believed them or felt that they would look bad if they didn't give Bush his authorization.

And we're in the war because Bush defied the limits of the authorization that he was given.

We're in the war because of lying, but that's not the same as corruption.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Backlash Cometh Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-16-06 04:02 PM
Response to Reply #52
53. Oh, and I thought we were in there for the oil.
That's what I mean about corruption. Where there are greenbacks to be had, there are plenty of reasons to sabotage good public policy. The oil is the main reason Bush was interested in Iraq. Everything else was smoke and mirrors, atleast from the Bush inner circle. People like Colin Powell, on the other hand, needed to be manipulated, and this, perhaps they did by tweaking some sense of duty or, maybe, by giving his son a cushy job with the FCC. Everybody can be bought. But you follow the money to find the source.

You need to focuse on Bush's true motivation, not on how he went about achieving it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
aintitfunny Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-16-06 11:49 AM
Response to Reply #26
44. That may be true. I personally do not think
an elected official should accept a free soda from a lobbyist. I think it is a priority, unfortunately there are many priorities and saving lives by limited our losses in Iraq is right at the top. There are a lot of priorities period, I agree corruption is one of them.

However, it did not seem right to paint Murtha as corrupt. Steny Hoyer has won the day, I am okay with that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Backlash Cometh Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-17-06 03:04 PM
Response to Reply #44
56. I think this Democratic win will be limited in its success unless we
Edited on Fri Nov-17-06 03:37 PM by The Backlash Cometh
clearly make the correlation between corruption and bad public policy. You end the firrst, and it will go a long way to solving the second problem.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Freddie Stubbs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-16-06 09:50 AM
Response to Reply #1
12. He was one of only 12 Democrats in the House to oppose McCainFeingold
Edited on Thu Nov-16-06 09:54 AM by Freddie Stubbs
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sandnsea Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-16-06 09:38 AM
Response to Original message
2. Hoyer is the lobbyist king
He opposes lobbying reform. He is our Tom Delay, make no mistake about it.

"Over the last year and a half, Hoyera protg of Tony Coelho, the former California congressman who revolutionized Democratic fundraising in the 1980shas led an aggressive effort to raise money from K Street lobbyists. Even more important, he has seemed unwilling to fundamentally rethink the unhealthy relationship between lobbyists and legislators that currently drives our political system. If Democrats are not only to regain power, but to maintain it and govern in a fairer and more responsive fashion, theyll need to unite behind root-and-branch reform. But the evidence suggests that Hoyer lacks the political vision, and the will, to do so."


http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/features/2006/0611.rot...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DemocratSinceBirth Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-16-06 09:40 AM
Response to Original message
3. For Better Or Worse He's A Old School Pol Who Believes Niceties Like That Interfere With Business
I think that's a fair assessment.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Backlash Cometh Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-16-06 09:45 AM
Response to Reply #3
6. Not a good thing.
That does not jive with this new era of transparency we're trying to achieve. If he has cronies that he thinks he needs to reward I say we play by his rules and use him to get us out of Iraq, then, show him the door.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
warrens Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-16-06 09:44 AM
Response to Original message
5. On Hardball, he said he was misquoted
He evidently said that it was sad that we have to spend so much time on "this garbage" when there are more serious issues out there, and that a few criminals have pushed it to the top of the to-do list. He's not against it, just wishes the energy could be applied to Iraq or healthcare.

Personally, the interview sort of turned me against him. He sounds too one-issue to me.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Backlash Cometh Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-16-06 09:47 AM
Response to Reply #5
7. If that issue is Iraq, then this may be the man and the time and the place.
We'll worry about his limitations after we leave Iraq. In the meantime, he can use the time to consider a change.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DemocratSinceBirth Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-16-06 09:47 AM
Response to Reply #5
8. Because He Thinks Goo Goo Good Government Types Are Effete
Again, I think that's a fair assessment...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
originalpckelly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-16-06 09:47 AM
Response to Original message
9. He's not against campaign reform, he's for the status-quo...
There's a big difference.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Backlash Cometh Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-16-06 09:51 AM
Response to Reply #9
13. The little hairs on my arms and neck are rising.
The status quo? What status quo would that be? The one that transfers power from twiddle dee to twiddle dum?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KittyWampus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-16-06 10:08 AM
Response to Reply #13
29. excellent quote BC!
The status quo? What status quo would that be? The one that transfers power from twiddle dee to twiddle dum?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bluerum Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-16-06 09:48 AM
Response to Original message
10. His point is that congress critters and senate members should be
smart, have integrity, be trustworthy enough so that this kind of legislation should not be required. He considers it a waste of time and resources.

I don't think that he is worried about his own skin. I think that he is worried about wasting time on something that should not be an issue.

But people are weak frail things - when you allow unlimited lobby dollars to be waved under their noses they follow the scent. And the responsibility of sorting out the legal contributions from the illegal contributions falls on the people who accept the money.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Backlash Cometh Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-16-06 09:53 AM
Response to Reply #10
15. Well, that's the point, isn't it. It IS an issue.
Corruption in the house and senate, is one of two reasons that people voted for the Democrats and why they're now in power. Murtha had better not forget that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RB TexLa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-16-06 09:50 AM
Response to Original message
11. I find all this concern with campaign and lobbying reform quite funny

In Louisiana we prefer "pretty good" government, tends to be more efficient.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DemocratSinceBirth Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-16-06 09:51 AM
Response to Reply #11
14. That's One Way Of Looking At It...
Edited on Thu Nov-16-06 09:52 AM by DemocratSinceBirth
Two things you shouldn't watch...

Legislation being made and sausage being made...

But can we be better than that?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Backlash Cometh Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-16-06 09:56 AM
Response to Reply #11
16. I wouldn't have used Louisiana as a model example of government.
Even in pre-Katrina times, there were something fishy going on in Louisiana when it came to honest government, so let's avoid going down that road.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RB TexLa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-16-06 09:58 AM
Response to Reply #16
20. I didn't advocate honest government

Like I said "pretty good" government
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Backlash Cometh Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-16-06 09:59 AM
Response to Reply #20
21. I'm shooting for better.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
berni_mccoy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-16-06 09:56 AM
Response to Original message
17. DAMNIT PEOPLE, HE IS NOT! There is an ORCHESTRATED CAMPAIGN to destroy his reputation
AND PEOPLE HERE ARE FALLING FOR IT!

Watch the ENTIRE TAPE HERE: http://journals.democraticunderground.com/berni_mccoy/1...

Read my analysis.

Murtha NEVER criticized campaign reform, HE CRITICIZED THE PEOPLE WHO HAVE ETHICS ISSUES.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Backlash Cometh Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-16-06 09:57 AM
Response to Reply #17
18. Then I suggest you write to rawstory, because they seem to be
encouraging this swiftboating. I'm going to hold judgment a little longer.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
greyl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-16-06 10:02 AM
Response to Reply #18
24. "I'm going to hold judgment a little longer."
You mean before you start a thread with a title which assumes he is against campaign reform?
Glad to hear it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Backlash Cometh Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-16-06 10:04 AM
Response to Reply #24
25. I included the word "allegedly" there somewhere.
There has to be a reason why people aren't sure about where he stands. This is an opportunity for him to come out and make it crystal clear.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DemocratSinceBirth Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-16-06 10:07 AM
Response to Reply #24
27. I Read Where He Was Of Only Four House Dems To Vote Against McCain-Feingold...
eom
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
berni_mccoy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-16-06 10:08 AM
Response to Reply #27
30. Link please. And it better have a credible source.
It wouldn't be Freerepublic where you read that would it?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DemocratSinceBirth Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-16-06 10:15 AM
Response to Reply #30
32. You Should Apologize For Your Libelous Insinuation But I Won't Hold My Breath
Here's the link...

http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2002/roll034.xml


My bad it was twelve...


And if you have a shred of dignity you will withdraw your Free Republic crack...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
berni_mccoy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-16-06 11:41 AM
Response to Reply #32
41. Link doesn't work. And if you had a shred of dignity, you'd present evidence with your claims
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DemocratSinceBirth Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-16-06 11:48 AM
Response to Reply #41
43. Here It Is Again
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
berni_mccoy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-16-06 12:09 PM
Response to Reply #43
48. Likes like a lot more than 4 Dems voted NO on the BCRA
So, again, check your facts and evidence before buying into the hype.

Yes he voted no. And you could attack the voting record of every politician. The key is WHY did he vote no? Was it because he was breaking that law? Was it because he felt legislating campaign finance was useless (think 527's)? Was it because he felt the way to solve the problem was to make campaign finance publicly funded? Because vote records don't reflect reasoning, you should never use them alone to judge someone.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DemocratSinceBirth Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-16-06 12:50 PM
Response to Reply #48
51. Twelve House Dems Opposed It...Not Four...My Bad...
So he was a six percenter instead of a two percenter...

Sincerely, isn't that a distinction without a difference...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DemocratSinceBirth Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-16-06 10:00 AM
Response to Reply #17
22. It's Not An Isolated Incident- There's A Pattern...
He's a wheeler-dealer...

That's an emperical observation not a subjective judgement.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
berni_mccoy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-16-06 10:07 AM
Response to Reply #22
28. Present your evidence then.
I've not seen a shred of evidence that Murtha has a pattern of Ethics issues.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DemocratSinceBirth Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-16-06 10:20 AM
Response to Reply #28
34. Is CREW A Freeper Front Group? Oh My...
http://www.citizensforethics.org/press/newsrelease.php?...


This is a reverse form of McCarthyism... Accusing your opponents of being wingnuts...


In my best Joseph Welch voice"Have you no sense of decency, sir? At long last, have you left no sense of decency?"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
berni_mccoy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-16-06 11:55 AM
Response to Reply #34
45. CREW's Also Running a Headline that MISQUOTE's Murtha
They've jumped to the conclusion that everyone else has without knowing the facts.

Of course, if you READ the report they had on Murtha, you'd see statements like this:

If Rep. Murtha accepted campaign contributions from the PMA Group and its associates
in return for legislative assistance by way of federal earmarks for the lobbying firms clients he
likely violated 5 U.S.C. 7353 and House Rule XXIII.


You see, even CREW doesn't have the FACTS. IF they did, then Murtha would be in JAIL by now.

Should this issue be looked into? Certainly. But the way to do that is NOT by PROMOTING A BLATANTLY FALSE STORY on FAUX NEWS that SLANDERS his credibility.

If you ACTUALLY Watch the ENTIRE ABSCAM TAPE, you'd be defending Murtha and not discrediting him.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DemocratSinceBirth Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-16-06 12:00 PM
Response to Reply #45
46. Twenty Two GOPU Members On The List And Three Democrats
It seems CREW is one of the good guys...

http://www.beyonddelay.org/
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
berni_mccoy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-16-06 12:11 PM
Response to Reply #46
49. And even the good guys buy the B.S. sometimes before they realize it's B.S.
And note that Murtha is in their dishonorable list, not in the 20 most corrupt. That's because they don't have any EVIDENCE to accuse him with. Should the allegations be investigated by the Ethics Committee? Certainly. But he's innocent until proven otherwise.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DemocratSinceBirth Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-16-06 12:06 PM
Response to Reply #45
47. I Have A Serious Question.
CREW is a non-partisan , progressive watchdog group...


Why did they put John Murtha on the "bad" list:

http://www.beyonddelay.org /



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
berni_mccoy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-16-06 12:11 PM
Response to Reply #47
50. See my response above.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Totally Committed Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-16-06 10:01 AM
Response to Original message
23. Because his position on the war is his only "progressive" poition...
Otherwise, he's just another old-school Dem who wants to keep getting elected the old-fashioned way. And, btw, Hoyer is even worse, as he is the DLC pick, so I'm letting the Divine sort this one out.

TC


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mmonk Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-16-06 10:09 AM
Response to Original message
31. Don't take everything you hear initially as is. My advice is to take
derogatory comments towards him with a bag of salt. Power politics are underway.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Backlash Cometh Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-16-06 10:28 AM
Response to Reply #31
35. I'm doing better than that.
Constant vigiliance, and all that. It's good to have an open discussion on this issue so that we can get down to the truth. Or, the discussion itself might grow geometrically until Murtha himself, decides to speak clearly and explain himself in a way where there will be no question about what he stands for.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Wielding Truth Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-16-06 10:16 AM
Response to Original message
33. Backlash , I see your concern, but when it comes to our country
Murtha has proven to be a supporter of what helps his constitutes and our democracy. If campaign reform would be stressed by us, the public, he would stand up a fight for changes against corruption.

He has shown himself to be a strong willed American more so than a self motivated politician. His strength is what has been lacking in current leadership. His loyalty has always remained, to my satisfaction, to the people he serves.

He is not in Washington for himself.

If he were he would not have cared that BushCo has been wiping America's face in mud.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Backlash Cometh Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-16-06 10:29 AM
Response to Reply #33
36. I'm counting on it.
We make it an issue now, and good people in Congress will respond accordingly.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KittyWampus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-16-06 10:36 AM
Response to Reply #33
38. Bullshit, Murtha is a homophobic, anti-choice old fool. If the high number of people
who cited corruption as their important issue doesn't send a signal to the geezer, what will?

He thinks that everyone should just be ethical. Yeah, right. That has worked SO well in past. Look how well it works for corporations.

And with Pelosi using this bill to show Democrats are cleaning up government Murtha is a complete idiot for not realising the importance of using legislation to both mold behavior and garnering public support.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Backlash Cometh Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-16-06 10:55 AM
Response to Reply #38
40. There are too many good ole boys in my area to feel comfortable
with Murtha's response the way you describe it. They expect all the little people in the community to be good and follow rules, while they feel it's their right to bend the rules in the back room...for the good of the community.

I just want to be sure Murtha, isn't that kind of person.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Wielding Truth Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-17-06 11:15 AM
Response to Reply #38
54. You really think Hoyer is a better choice? Well, we will see.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
grizmaster Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-16-06 11:47 AM
Response to Original message
42. He's not against it
stop buying the MSM cr@p and check out what he really said
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
librechik Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-17-06 11:18 AM
Response to Original message
55. Forget about Murtha, I have
as soon as I found out he was anti choice, I lost my lust for Murtha. Let him go to the back bench. Pelosi was just being loyal to an old friend; she should be admired for that, not villified.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Jul 25th 2014, 04:54 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC