ah murky the racist. On Feb 10, 7:13 am, "liberal mike532 !" <[email protected]> wrote: > Is GOP Party Chair Michael Steele confused about jobs and campaign > money? BF's Account of His Checkered Political History. > Submitted by meg on Mon, 02/09/2009 - 1:01pm. Analysis > A BUZZFLASH NEWS ANALYSIS > by Meg White > > Jobs are on everyone's mind right now. Spokespeople for every party > and organization in the country are weighing in on the subject, > whether they have any idea what they're talking about or not. > > So it is with newly-minted GOP National Committee Chair Michael > Steele. On Sunday, Steele got into a confusing argument with George > Stephanopoulos on This Week. He declared that people employed by the > government don't really have "jobs" per se: > > "If you got a government contract that's a fixed period of time it > goes away. The work may go away. There's no guarantee that there's > going to be more work when you're done with that job." > > Watch a snippet of the interview here: > > When Stephanopoulos noted that private sector jobs are not any more > stable than government ones, Steele said cryptically that "they come > back." > > Steele's argument willfully ignored the existence of millions of > teachers, police officers and other federal and state employees, who > are by no means temporary workers. Steele also ignores the fact that > much of the work that will come out of the stimulus bill will go to > private companies in the form of government contracts. > > Essentially, Steele would rather the government give private > companies > tax breaks than contracts, so he makes a nonsensical argument to try > to bolster his party's flawed line of reasoning on the stimulus > package. He calls the work temporary, but tax cuts are an even more > short-lived solution. > > Steele's lack of a coherent argument about employment goes back > further than Sunday, however. He has been living off his party and > the government for years, so it is ironic that he still denies that > the government can produce jobs. Steele's story is proof that his own > argument about government jobs is wrong, with a hint of corruption > thrown in for good measure. > > Steele started out as a Republican Party regular in Maryland. When he > was tapped to run for lieutenant governor in 2002, his private sector > job wasn't cutting it, so the GOP paid Steele $5,000 a month to run > for the office. Though the arrangement was unusual, and called > "obscene" by the opposition at the time, it is legal for a party to > pay a candidate to run. > > The real question is, if Steele truly thinks the private sector is > the > key to the success of this country, why did he close down his legal > consulting firm and accept an allowance from the GOP to run for > office? > > It seems that the party stipend and the years of being on the state's > payroll as lieutenant governor weren't enough for Steele. > Contemplating a future run for governor as his term as lieutenant > governor ran out in 2007, he instructed an aide to transfer more than > $500,000 from his lieutenant governor campaign funds to another bank > account so that the GOP could not distribute the funds to other > candidates. > > Such a transfer of funds is legal, but only because Steele planned to > use it to run for state office, not spend it on his failed 2006 > Senate > race, which would have been a national office. The accusation of > illegality, contained in a confidential court document accidentally > mailed to The Washington Post, is based on the fact that the transfer > was carried out by an aide and not Steele himself. > > Steele contends that the transfer was legal. In fact, Steele insists > that every accusation levied against him by his former finance chair > for his 2006 Senate run is false. Alan Fabian was convicted on > unrelated fraud charges and made several accusations against Steele > in > a failed effort to get a reduced sentence. > > Fabian also accused Steele of making improper campaign fund payments, > both to his own sister for more than $37,000 and to a law firm to the > tune of $75,000. Fabian alleged the services for which the payments > were made were never rendered. Furthermore, The Washington Post > notes > that Steele's sister's company had been dissolved for 11 months by > the > time the payment was made. > > These payments may be, as Steele insists, perfectly legal. But the > fact that Steele is being investigated by the FBI suggests that this > is more than just a convicted felon naming names in order to get out > of jail sooner. > > Furthermore, Fabian's story makes more sense in historical context. > As > part of a failed bid for state comptroller in 1998, Steele owed > $35,000 in campaign debt, mostly to his sister. Also, he's been fined > twice for missing campaign reporting deadlines. The overall situation > suggests a lack of good judgment, a worrisome pattern of ethical > problems and sketchy motivation for Steele's entire political career. > > Steele's brand new job is to get members of his party elected to > Congress. His history of problems with campaign finance shouldn't > inspire much confidence. Moreover, he doesn't seem to think the > government provides real jobs. In keeping with his twisted logic, he > axed a slew of jobs as one of his first acts as GOP chair. Steele > seems to be saying that only he and his family should be allowed to > live off of party and government money. > > As we noted last week, Steele fits quite nicely into the > characteristic GOP hypocrite frame. Not only is he duplicitous for > promising change but delivering more of the same, but he's > hypocritical in his desire to live off the taxes and political > contributions of others, at the same time that he criticizes the idea > that the public sector could be a source of employment. > > Steele is just one more contradiction showing that the GOP's economic > arguments fail to pass the common sense test. It looks to us like > Steele is not in government to serve the public, but to enrich > himself > and his own friends and family, while working to reduce the > government > itself to drowning size. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. * Read the latest breaking news, and more. -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
