So Jane Hamsher is PAID by REPUBLICANS to run campaigns against DEMOCRATS?

[wndycty]

So while she out there calling Obama out, saying he is not progressive enough she owns an advertising/media firm that works for Republicans, hell even BP. She never had any credibility in my mind, and this just reinforces it.

Media Types: Don’t Call Someone Who Works for Republicans a Disaffected Progressive

-snip-
Yes, that’s right, CommonSense Media, a firm that does work for Republicans, is led by Jane Hamsher.

In isolation, I don’t care what Jane Hamsher does for money (and it’s not even clear that any revenues from CommonSense Media make it to Hamsher’s pocket). She can do whatever she wants, and I’m not interested in getting in to any battle about purity with her or any of her allies. But it’s time for the media to stop lazily presenting her as a representative figure of liberal Democrats, of the Netroots or of ideologically committed progressives. She’s not. She’s someone who leads a firm that Republicans pay to help them defeat Democrats.

CommonSense Media Ad Network has done work for Democrats in the past, and they may still be doing work for Democrats. They have done work for Harry Reid. In 2011 Hamsher may be telling prospective Obama voters “don’t give yourself away cheaply,” but in 2010 they thought the president was still in to them, because the Democratic National Committee paid for $10,000 worth of advertising through CommonSense Media.

But CommonSense Media also does work for entities working against progressive interests and Democratic candidates. At the same time BP was being accused of “greenwashing” their record after the Gulf oil spill, CommonSense media was doing online advertising for BP. In Campaigns and Elections magazine’s political pages, a directory of political consultants, Democratic firms have a D after their name, Republicans an R. Commonsense Media has an N (presumably either “nonpartisan” or “neutral”).

There isn’t a good online tool to search for vendors listed in FEC reports, so it’s unclear which Republican(s) are CommonSense Media clients. I suspect they’re not working for rightwing culture warriors. In fact, I wouldn’t be surprised if they’re working for Scott-Walker-if-he-were-more-low-key-&-didn’t-care-if-you-get-stoned, AKA Greenwald-darling Gary Johnson. But just because we don’t know which Republicans they’re working for, Commonsense Media says they have Republican clients, so why shouldn’t we take them at their word?
-snip-

http://rootedcosmopolitan.wordpress.com/2011/06/20/jane-hamsher-republican-consultant/

[pnwmom]

1. Good catch. Thanks. n/t

[Name removed]

31. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[SidDithers]

34. Comparing apples and bananas...

Commonsense Media Ads is the equivalent of Google Ads, not DU.

Sid

[pnwmom]

51. If any Republican is crazy enough to want to throw money away here,

I'm all for it. Let's drain them dry.

But Hamsher is taking Rethug money and successfully attacking and dividing Democrats with it. That's a whole different thing.

[Name removed]

2. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[SidDithers]

3. K&R...

Good post.

Sid

[Indykatie]

4. This Would Explain Their Utter Disdain for Obama

I initially thought the disdain was tied to their support for Hillary. I stopped reading the FDL blogs some time ago. Isn't Jane a co-founder of FDL or do I have her confused with someone else.

[EFerrari]

9. It doesn't, really, since the Obama administration itself was greenwashing BP

like when they were out into the media and told us hiding oil with dispersant was the same as getting rid of it.

[DFab420]

25. You know whats really funny...

"But CommonSense Media also does work for entities working against progressive interests and Democratic candidates. At the same time BP was being accused of “greenwashing” their record after the Gulf oil spill, CommonSense media was doing online advertising for BP"

From the article

[EFerrari]

33. Jane Hamsher didn't turn our beaches over to BP

so they could keep the public and the media out. That was the administration.

[chill_wind]

39. For real!

:hi:

[Name removed]

87. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[DFab420]

94. That's true. But her company DID take money from those same BP bastards

to make it seem like they were cleaning up the beaches...

Not defending the Administration. Just saying, CSM was complicit in the cover up too.

[Number23]

117. Shhhh. Don't upset the usuals...

And the notion that Obama closed the beaches so that BP, a foreign owned company, could hide from the American media and public is hilarious and adorable. Even Lindsay Lohan can't hide from the American media (no matter how hard some of us may wish that she could).

[AlabamaLibrul]

140. you wouldn't know unless you were here -- such "hilarity" n/t

[JTFrog]

5. Quelle surprise. n/t

[jaxx]

6. I'm not surprised.

Hamsher is a social climber who uses people to advance her agenda....herself.

[MilesColtrane]

132. Indeed, she has a lot in common with Arianna Huffington in that respect.

Hamsher is just not as good at it.

[wndycty]

7. Wow. . .I see folks on DU are unrec'ing information they don't like. . .

. . .wow!

[sabrina 1]

26. No, unreccing because it is a smear job and a bad one at that

if you read the article.

Hyperbolic headline, that doesn't match what is in the article

And I don't even like Hamsher, but hysteria like this should not be given credibility.

[wndycty]

29. That so called hyperbolic headline is no worse than the bullshit that Jane Hamsher and FDL put out

:kick:

[sabrina 1]

37. Wait. So you know the headline is a lie contradicted in the

article itself, and you are justifying that?

All this will do is gain sympathy for Hamsher which is always the result of smear campaigns.

[dionysus]

38. ROFL smear jobs are only fair when used on Obama!! leave jane alone!1!1

:rofl:

[sabrina 1]

68. Someone said that?

Fyi, criticism of policy is not a smear job. It is a citizen's duty.

Posting a headline about someone taking money from Republicans when it is an outright lie, contradicted in the body of the article itself, is a smear job and wrong no matter who it is aimed at.

[Name removed]

89. Deleted message

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Occulus]

8. "...it’s unclear which Republican(s) are CommonSense Media clients. I suspect..."

Smear blog post. It makes me wonder at the writer's motives, which I suspect is opposite the intended reaction.

See how easy that is? Unrec for 'transparent attempt'.

[EFerrari]

15. "it's not even clear that any revenues from CommonSense Media make it to Hamsher’s pocket"

Lame, even childish attempt to smear a good progressive.

[wndycty]

16. Oh so she can smear Obama, but when she is called out over her corporate ties to Republicans. . .

. . .BP, et al, its a smear by us who call her out?

Very, very rich!

[EFerrari]

20. Your claim that she is paid to defeat Democrats is contradicted

by your own post.

And you really shouldn't attack anyone who helped BP greenwash their felonies because no one helped them more than Obama.

[dionysus]

42. hey, it's not like she works with grover norquist or anything... oh wait.. she does.

;)

[EFerrari]

54. Wait -- what happened to our bipartisan happy dance?

It's only wrong when Jane does it?

[dionysus]

57. LOL. hey, you can defend hamsters goal of undermining the dems all you want. no one's stopping you.

[EFerrari]

58. Jane threatens loyalists because she wants Democrats to act like Democrats.

:)

[dionysus]

60. jane's holding a personal grudge from 08, and likes lining her pockets with gullible people's money.

[Number23]

118. +1000

BigotBasher has done some excellent OPs on Jane Hamsher (or Ham Janesher, as he calls her). I don't see how anyone that considers themself a "liberal" could support this woman. Unless of course, they share her PUMA'sish tendencies.

[Name removed]

126. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Number23]

128. And yet, 75% of liberals and 86% of Liberal Dems do

http://www.gallup.com/poll/124922/Presidential-Approval-Center.aspx

The more liberal, the higher the support. Does that anger you? :)

[Whisp]

115. that's right, Obama shouldn't be seen with a Repuglican in public EVER

that just shows he's playing with them behind our backs.

offs!

maybe he should lead from a Cone of Silence, with tinted glass.

geeeeezus!

[EFerrari]

157. Thanks for making my point.

[onpatrol98]

156. oohhh

Now...that's a strange camera shot...LOL

[tridim]

10. That explains a lot.

I bet MSNBC will still pay her even after this revelation. Wake the hell up Cenk.

[CakeGrrl]

11. Like flies to flypaper with this "He's just not into us" crud, eh?

Divide and conquer. They never quit, and Dems just keep falling for it.

[Bobbie Jo]

17. GOP 101

LIE, CHEAT, STEAL...

Lather, Rinse, Repeat...

[KittyWampus]

70. I'ts called RATFUCKING. That's the actual name for Republicans attacking from the Left.

[Scurrilous]

12. K & R

:thumbsup:

[NorthCarolina]

13. LOL. The right really hates Jane don't they......nt

[OneGrassRoot]

14. Wow. K&R n/t

[Chimichurri]

18. Nonsense.

[Champion Jack]

19. K & R

[MineralMan]

21. Hmm...

I knew that Huffington was a mole, but...

[FSogol]

22. K & R. n/t

[xphile]

23. From the article:

"Jeff Cosgrove, managing director of the CommonSense Media online advertising network, which has clients in both parties, said a growing number of campaigns book ads in connection with television appearances or other public events."

Emphasis from the linked article.

What a complete slime job. Unrec for disingenuous bullshit.

[sabrina 1]

24. This is proof of something?

Looks like proof that there are a lot of people who hate Hamsher because she fought for a PO in the HC.

Sorry, but this is almost desperate:

There isn’t a good online tool to search for vendors listed in FEC reports, so it’s unclear which Republican(s) are CommonSense Media clients. I suspect they’re not working for rightwing culture warriors. In fact, I wouldn’t be surprised if they’re working for Scott-Walker-if-he-were-more-low-key-&-didn’t-care-if-you-get-stoned, AKA Greenwald-darling Gary Johnson. But just because we don’t know which Republicans they’re working for, Commonsense Media says they have Republican clients, so why shouldn’t we take them at their word?

Whoever wrote this childish piece of garbabge must hate Daily Kos even more, not to mention many Democrats.

Unrec'd for false claims. And no, I am not and never have been a fan of Hamsher and have had many issues with her in the past along with other so-called progressives. But this is just silly.

[SidDithers]

27. Lots of questions about how Jane and her PACs spend their money too...

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2010/03/29/852037/-How-Jane-Hamsher-Spends-Her-PAC-Money

Sid

[Scurrilous]

112. Thanks for the link.

:thumbsup:

[sabrina 1]

28. Headline completely contradicts the article itself. It's hard to

believe those rec'ing it actually read it.

[Rowdyboy]

30. K&R

[Ikonoklast]

32. Hamsher has many here fooled, she's in it FOR THE MONEY.

Just like that phony Huffington, she found that the 'Right' side of the money equation was crowded, so she went 'Left', until she could cash out.

Hamsher would sell whatever she gets paid to sell, as long as the check cashes, who cares who writes it?

[SidDithers]

35. +1...

and she pays herself and her associated businesses very well from her PACs.

Sid

[EFerrari]

36. Jane hasn't set up a super PAC to raise a billion anonymous dollars for 2012.

I think you have her confused with someone else.

[SidDithers]

44. But she does have a couple of regular PACs that funnel a nice little chunk into her pocket...nt

http://www.opensecrets.org/pacs/lookup2.php?cycle=2010&strID=C00466953
http://www.opensecrets.org/pacs/lookup2.php?cycle=2010&strID=C00452177

Sid

[EFerrari]

48. Oh, no! And here I thought she lived on air!

lol

[Ikonoklast]

45. She also isn't trying to get elected to the highest office in this country.

She's just trying to cash in wherever she can.

Jane's in show business, and that's how she earns her money.

Just playing a part for a paycheck.

She is as much a 'journalist' as Limbaugh.

[EFerrari]

47. So, you're saying that raising a billion anonymous dollars is fine

if all you're buying is the White House?

[Name removed]

53. Deleted message

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[OnyxCollie]

76. You assume Democrats are angels.

"If men were angels, no government would be necessary. If angels were to govern men, neither external nor internal controls on government would be necessary."

Democrats Make It Official: They'll Take Undisclosed Donations, Too
http://nationaljournal.com/politics/democrats-make-it-official-they-ll-take-undisclosed-donations-too-20110429

Prominent Democratic strategists, including two former top aides to President Obama, are formally launching independent committees aimed at countering the onslaught of outside Republican organizations expected to spend hundreds of millions of dollars on the 2012 presidential campaign.

Priorities USA and Priorities USA Action, the two companion committees, hope to raise $100 million to defend Obama, organizers said, an amount that will allow them to run ads competing with American Crossroads, the American Action Network, and other Republican-backing outside organizations.

The organization will not live up to the same campaign finance standards by which Obama has pledged to run its campaign. They will take unregulated donations that do not require disclosure; Obama and Capitol Hill Democrats have railed against Crossroads and other Republican groups that do the same thing. The organizers said the 2010 Supreme Court decision in Citizens United, opening the door to unlimited corporate contributions, left them no choice.

[Ikonoklast]

61. False choice.

Show me where money is coming from anonymous sources, first off.


If there was a Socialist running for the White House, guess what?

They'd need to raise a billion dollars, too, if they wanted to win

Bernie Sanders hits me up for dough on a regular basis, and I kick him a few bucks here and there, even though I can't vote for him.

Ads, TV time, campaign staff...all cost money.

Jane is cashing in, just like Arianne did.

If there was no money to be made doing what she is doing, she wouldn't be doing it.



Beats working for a living.

[flamingdem]

131. She's living the American dream! nt

[JackRiddler]

160. Yeah, so totally unlike Dana Houle, author of this smear piece.

But anyway, the usual: don't talk about ideas, talk about personalities!

[eilen]

40. Doesn't Obama and other Democratic politicians take money from Republicans?

Or are the donations from Goldman Sachs just from the employees who are registered Democrats? Is that billion dollars of sweet campaign cash coming from the ground down unemployed grassroots voters? Those pharmaceutical and insurance lobbies-- not notably progressive. Over Reaching for a little character assassination much?

[wndycty]

41. Obama is not going around calling out of Democrats/progressives as not progressive enough. . .

:kick:

[eilen]

49. is that supposed to be funny/joke? nt

[EFerrari]

52. That's right. He goes on Fox and brags about not giving in to the left.

[KoKo]

121. Obama trashes the LEFT of Democrats every chance he gets..

At first I thought it was because he was playing 3-D Chess with the Right Wing Democrats so he could win favors and votes from Repugs on his Legislation

But as time has gone on ..I've realized that he really is a Republican and so his job was to Marginalize the True Dems to win favor for the Repugs of Bush.

[H2O Man]

43. Recommended.

I've never liked nor trusted her.

[KoKo]

120. Really? I thought I first saw you here defending FireDogLake for Scooter Libby

Investigation.

Am I wrong on this? I could check DU Archives for this.

[H2O Man]

145. Not me.

I thought FDL did some good work on the Libby case. I also thought some there took credit for other people's work/results. But I never liked, nor defended them.

[Melinda]

46. "...it’s unclear which Republican(s) are CommonSense Media clients." This is PROOF?!?!

Ooooh, so now I get it... Up really is down, and War really is Peace!!

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

And because some anon blogger says so, your OP too must be true!!

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

Have a lovely day. :)
Melinda

Edited ellipsis.

[Name removed]

50. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[phleshdef]

55. BUSTED. I had her pegged the moment I first listened to her actually talk.

I knew there was some quality to her that always made me think she was a complete fake. She argues like a Republican. She has that habit of blatantly dismissing even the most undeniably valid of points if they come anywhere close to puncturing her argument. She can barely say a word without making an insanely hyperbolic accusation. Now its all starting to make sense. She exists to sew discontent between all wings of the Democratic party.

[Bobbie Jo]

133. Exactly. Complete phony.

[Puregonzo1188]

56. Shoot the messenger I see.

[EFerrari]

59. If you read the article, you'd shoot the messenger, too. lol

[WillyT]

62. Wow... Are U Late To The Party... ROFLMAO

CommonSense Media Advertising Network

CSMAds is a division of CommonSense Media and is led by Jane Hamsher, founder of the popular political news and commentary site www.firedoglake.com

Ad manager Jeff Cosgrove is an experienced advertising professional with deep roots in political and issue advertising. Jeff heads up an advertising team focused on delighting advertisers and publishers alike.

Since its founding in 2007, CSMAds has helped numerous campaigns and brands connect with a growing active, highly-educated and politically-aware audience. Advertisers from BP to the ACLU work with CSMAds in order to engage intelligent and influential readers.

Armed with deep technical experience and with real-world experience and knowledge of the political news, commentary and issues of the day publishing and advertising arena, CSMAds provides its publishers and advertising clients with an ROI that regularly outperforms the market.

Link: http://csmads.com/about.html

CommonSense Media Advertising Network

CSMAds is a vertical content ad network, aggregating one of the fastest growing and active audiences on the internet – readers of political news, commentary and issues of the day.

Be they positioned to the Left, Right or Center, political news, commentary and issues websites and blogs are exploding online. People worldwide are increasingly turning to the internet for their news, commentary and issues "fix."

This contextually aggregated audience personifies “engagement.” CSMAds works closely with political news, commentary and issue-specific websites and blogs, matching their highly desired professional content with quality advertisers and campaigns.

Advertisers and agencies with politically-oriented or issue-related messages can deliver their campaigns and calls-to-action to a no-doubt-about-it engaged and interested audience.

Link: http://csmads.com/index.html


I think I'll just go with what VCubed and bmull said in the comment section of this Whinejob:

VCubed says:
June 20, 2011 at 5:19 pm

I would be upset about this “news”, if it weren’t for the fact that Democrats also take money from Republicans. Our entire problem is legalized bribery aka campaign contributions. If the all-powerful Democrats in the House, Senate and presidency take million$ from bankers, hedge fund managers, oil and gas and nuclear corporations, what’s the diff? For 2012, Obama alone “needs” to raise $1,000,000,000 – that’s one billion dollars. You think he’s going to get that from Democrats only? And one of the biggest Democratic donors, Savin, states his biggest priority is unconditional support for Israel from U.S. Deal w/the real problem: legalized bribery. In reality, we’re barely a step above Mexico when it comes to pay-to-play.

bmull says:
June 20, 2011 at 10:03 pm

Exactly. Almost every fatcat plays both sides, no matter how radical their personal politics. That’s the real issue here.

[CrossChris]

63. Why is bipartisanship okay when Obama does it? He & other Dems don't take Koch money?

I think this Hamsher stuff is part of an organized smear b/c she's critical of the President.

[amborin]

64. What a smear! Think Progress is included in this network, for starters

Jane Hamsher is listed as leading the CommonSense Media Advertising Network, which includes Crooks & Liars, Eschaton, FireDogLake, FiveTHirtyEight, Pam's House Blend, and Think Progress.

http://www.absoluteastronomy.com/topics/Jane_Hamsher

[CrossChris]

65. Good catch. Those running a smear campaign against Hamsher should be embarrassed.

It's sheer hypocrisy to go after Hamsher for having bipartisan ties when the entire theme of Obama's presidency has been his catering to the right, at a time when they had as little political capital as we're ever going to see.

[WillyT]

66. And RawStory, And MyDD, And BlueJersey, And A Whole Host Of Liberal Websites

:shrug:

:hi:

[amborin]

67. Crooks & Liars a client, too, speaking of which: how about backroom deals w/ Rethgs re: big Pharma?

Let's Make A Deal! White House Has Egg on Face After Admitting They Capped Drug Company Reform Costs


snip


"We were assured: ‘We need somebody to come in first. If you come in first, you will have a rock-solid deal,’ ” Billy Tauzin, the former Republican House member from Louisiana who now leads the pharmaceutical trade group, said Wednesday. “Who is ever going to go into a deal with the White House again if they don’t keep their word? You are just going to duke it out instead.”

http://beta.crooksandliars.com/susie-madrak/lets-make-deal-white-house-has-egg-fa

[FLAprogressive]

114. Don't let facts get in the way of a good smear.

[WillyT]

69. Dana Houle, The Author Of The Piece, Was The Former Chief-Of-Staff To...

Congressman Paul Hodes (D-NH), was his campaign manager before that, and posts at DailyKos.

More here: http://www.mnprogressiveproject.com/diary/3793/dana-houle-to-manage-matt-entenzas-campaign

And being part of the Party Establishment, I'm pretty sure he gets cranky with anybody upsetting the Party Elders.

:shrug:

[sabrina 1]

72. Dana Houle??

If ever there was a nasty individual, and a deceptive one, having posed for years on Daily Kos as just an ordinary 'citizen' without revealing his political career as a DC insider, he is the apex of that pile.

He finally had to reveal his real role on that blog, where he routinely got involved in some of the most nasty, vicious fights with ordinary people, getting them banned by they dozens, with impunity, until finally even Daily Kos could not continue to tolerate him. He was finally banned, but way too late in the minds of thousands of former members of that site.

Thanks, that explains completely the deception here.

He has a history of being among the most despised of bloggers, he was fired from his job as an aide to a Dem. Congressman for his shenanigans.

I missed his name for some reason, but that article is typical of what he does, nothing but a smear merchant, short on facts as always, and shame on anyone who would promote anything written by a failed, nasty, out-of-a-job because of his deceptions, idiot such as Dana Houle.

[WillyT]

74. Anytime Sabrina, Anytime...

:pals:

Ironic, is this thread... how so many of us get hectored for listening to those attempting to "mislead" us.

:banghead:

:hi:

[sabrina 1]

77. I don't know how I missed that name. Houle was fired by Rep.

Hodes of NH btw. He is probably among the most despised people on the internet. A truly hateful, nasty individual. He has done more harm to Democrats than any single blogger I can think of but he apparently is still a failure at what he most wanted, to become 'famous'. What he became was 'infamous'. And then I guess simply dismissed after finally compeltely imploding in NH and on DK.

Such people are an embarassment to the Dem. Party. I'm glad to see he never really got anywhere, too nasty even for politics I guess :-)

[amborin]

101. great sleuthing, WillyT, and thks for the additional info, Sabrina 1

[suffragette]

78. I posted asking who he is after you posted this

I really need to scroll down and read everything before I post :)

Thanks for providing some info on this.

[sabrina 1]

83. He was fired by Hodes and banned from DK.

So even the 'elders' found him too 'difficult' to deal with. :-)

[Name removed]

71. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

73. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[wndycty]

82. Well thank you!

:kick:

[suffragette]

75. Who is Dana Houle and who has he/is he working for?

[sabrina 1]

79. He used to be a Front Pager at

Daily Kos. A vicious, nasty and very deceptive individual, he posed for years on that blog as just another 'commenter' hiding the fact that he was a political operative there to 'steer' the discussion using thuggish tactics to get Liberals banned. He was universally despised and finally had to reveal his real ID, which of course surprised no one as he's not especially smart.

He worked on Paul Hodes' campaign in NH and was hired by him later, but even Hodes couldn't deal with him and he was 'resigned'. I doubt Hodes knew much about him to be honest until he was more aqainted with his tactics.

He is opposed to Election Reform and once used his FP status on DK to go after Bradblog starting yet another very nasty and vicious campaign against yet another individual working on something he did not want them working on. Brad took care of him nicely though, airc.

To answer your question, I guess he's now a nobody, too toxic for any serious Democrat to get involved in and with a visible and long history of abuse of ordinary people still available online, as far as I know, unless he has tried to scrub it.

A Rove wannabe would probably describe him best. And he absolutely hates Liberals.

Oh, and I'm being kind btw ~ :-)

[Luminous Animal]

80. Brad reporting on Dana

http://www.bradblog.com/?p=5702#more-5702

[suffragette]

98. Good to know this

Very interesting that he misrepresented himself for quite awhile.
I wasn't familiar with him.
Looks like he's working from Chicago now.

[Major Hogwash]

119. That was informative and very mild to what I heard others say about him.

That was the problem that Kos had with having so many outspoken Front Pagers.
I think Kos let it go on way too long before asking for an accounting of what was going on.

[JackRiddler]

158. Yes, and why did the OP snip out the byline revealing this to be an article by Dana Houle?

[suffragette]

166. Very good point

It is a curious omission, indeed.

Looks like he has quite the reputation.

[robdogbucky]

81. My take on the reasons the Pavrovian DLCers always attack Jane:

Odd Couple Of Norquist, Hamsher Call For Investigation, Rahm's Resignation
Dec 23 2009, 4:12 PM ET
Grover Norquist and Jane Hamsher are not often on the same side of anything, beyond both usually being in the Western Hemisphere. Norquist is a leading voice of fiscal conservatism as head of the anti-tax group Americans for Tax Reform; Hamsher is a leading voice of the digital left, whose blog Firedoglake has taken on influence in speaking up for progressives during the health care debate and in pressuring lawmakers through its activist arm, FDL Action.

But the two have united to level serious allegations at White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel and demand his resignation.


Hamsher and Norquist coauthored a letter to Attorney General Eric Holder today calling for a Department of Justice investigation of Emanuel for his role on the board of Freddie Mac, alleging that the White House, since Emanuel arrived there, has blocked an investigation of the government-sponsored mortgage lender.

Emanuel served on Freddie Mac's board in 2000-2001, when he quit to run (successfully) for Congress. He has also recently sparked the ire of liberals like Hamsher after it was reported that he pushed for Senate Democratic leaders to compromise with Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-CT) on health care reform and jettison an expansion of Medicare from the Senate bill.

See their letter below:
http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2009/12/odd-couple-of-norquist-hamsher-call-for-investigation-rahms-resignation/32543/



Just my dos centavos


robdogbucky

[girl gone mad]

96. Yep, the hate her for publicizing their corruption and misdeeds.

It's as superficial as that.

[mmonk]

84. If you had been privy to Firedoglake's meeting on things to

concentrate on concerning the 2012 elections, you wouldn't even go there.

[wndycty]

90. I have no desire to privy to anything having to do with Firedoglake and I AM PROUD TO GO THERE!

:kick:

[mmonk]

91. I know, smearing people is easier.

[Name removed]

97. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[wndycty]

100. So in your mind what makes me ignorant? Because I think Hamsher is a fraud. . .

. . .did I upset you by calling her out? Did I ruin your day? Why the name calling? Huh? Did your feelings get hurt?

[amborin]

103. refusal to consider valid data is a good definition of 'ignorant', & baseless smear-mongering, repr

ehehensible

[wndycty]

107. Valid data, her agency represents politicians from both parties as well as BP. . .

. . .so she can talk her Obama is not a progressive shit, but by her standards neither is she.

[amborin]

108. using baseless smears to try to impugn Hamsher is reprehensible

[wndycty]

110. Why is it reprehensible to criticize Hamsher, but the shit she does to Obama is acceptable

:kick:

[CreekDog]

85. is this saying we shouldn't deify her or that we shouldn't listen to her?

she's often right, i have no problem listening to her. as for the criticism that i might feel the need to take every position she does, some Obama advocates need to ask themselves the same question about his positions.

[Hutzpa]

86. Holy Shit!!

This is the killer sentence for me;

Don't call someone who works for a Republican a disaffected Progressive.

[LoZoccolo]

88. I had quit DU for ALMOST TWO DAYS but decided this thread deserves a K&R!

:kick:

[inna]

92. what trash. utterly ridiculous hit job. disgusting.

[LoZoccolo]

93. A lot of people seem to be calling the article a smear and a hit piece WITHOUT

establishing whether any of it is false.

[wndycty]

95. Yup. . .so sanctimonious like Hamsher

:kick:

[Name removed]

102. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Bobbie Jo]

134. It's an everyday occurrence here.

Where have you been?

[MadHound]

99. But hey, it's OK that the Koch brothers fund the DLC

And that Democrats hold shares in BP, and that Obama was paid off, err, received hundreds of thousands of dollars from Goldman Sachs, JP Morgan and Citigroup.

But if a critic of Obama does business with a 'Pug, even if she doesn't profit from it, that's heresy:eyes:

[Hell Hath No Fury]

105. Some people have just stopped making sense altogether.

I am more and more appalled by the political/ethical contortions we are witnessing by those who would defend/attack. I feel like I am caught in Crazy Town somedays. :crazy:

Jane continues to do what she has always done -- she nor her principles have changed - her target has, and so it is under the bus for you, Missy!

[Raine]

104. What a total piece of CRAP nt

:thumbsdown:

[JNelson6563]

106. Just another self-promoting whore like Huffington, Palin, Coulture

Though she most closely resembles Huffington in that she claims to be something she is not. So funny to see how many here swallow her nonsense hook, line and sinker. Oh and what's the reaction when it comes to light that she's a rightie manipulating the more fatalist-minded lefties by telling them what they want to hear? well they show their awesome political might by....unreccing this thread!

lolz

Julie

[Name removed]

109. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[wndycty]

111. You accused me of lying, what am I lyng about. . .

Hamsher's firms handles Republicans, Republicans run against Democrats. . .how am I lying?

[amborin]

113. DLC Funding: the Bradley Foundation, etc: "privatize public ed" & laissez-faire capitalism"

"..... DLC - FUNDING 101

http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Third_Way_Fo...

The Third Way:

The Third Way Foundation, formerly known as the Progressive Foundation, is an umbrella organization of New Democrats. The Progressive Policy Institute, the affiliated think tank of the Democratic Leadership Council (DLC), is a project of the foundation.

Political Funding:

1). Bradley Foundation:

http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Bradley_Foun...

"According to the Media Transparency web site, the Foundation's "resources, its clear political agenda, and its extensive national network of contacts and collaborators in political, academic and media circles has allowed it to exert an important influence on key issues of public policy. While its targets range from affirmative action to social security, it has seen its greatest successes in the areas of welfare 'reform' and attempts to privatize public education through the promotion of school vouchers....

"'The overall objective of the Bradley Foundation, however, is to return the U.S. -- and the world -- to the days before governments began to regulate Big Business, before corporations were forced to make concessions to an organized labor force. In other words, laissez-faire capitalism: capitalism with the gloves off.'"

2). Howard Gilman Foundation:

http://www.capitalresearch.org/search/gmdisplay.asp?Org...

3). Ameritech Foundation:

(prominently listed on SourceWatch, but only gave $10,000)

http://www.capitalresearch.org/search/gmdisplay.asp?Org... 1996 Grants

4). General Mills Foundation:

(prominently listed on SourceWatch, but only gave $20,000)

http://www.capitalresearch.org/search/gmdisplay.asp?Org... 1996 Grants


5). John M. Olin Foundation:

http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=John_M._Olin...

"The John M. Olin Foundation, based in New York, was established in 1953 by John Merrill Olin (1892-1982), inventor, industrialist, conservationist, and philanthropist. 'Olin was committed to the preservation of the principles of political and economic liberty as they have been expressed in American thought, institutions and practice.'<1> (http://www.jmof.org/history_purposes.html )

"'Accordingly, the general purpose of the John M. Olin Foundation is to provide support for projects that reflect or are intended to strengthen the economic, political and cultural institutions upon which the American heritage of constitutional government and private enterprise is based. The Foundation also seeks to promote a general understanding of these institutions by encouraging the thoughtful study of the connections between economic and political freedoms, and the cultural heritage that sustains them.'<2> (http://www.jmof.org/history_purposes.html )

"In 2001, the Foundation expended $20,482,961 to fund right-wing think tanks including the American Enterprise Institute (AEI), the Brookings Institution, the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), the Claremont Institute for the Study of Statesmanship and Political Philosophy, the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR), the Heritage Foundation, the Hoover Institution on War, Revolution and Peace, the Hudson Institute, the Independent Women's Forum, the Paul H. Nitze School of Advanced International Studies (SAIS) at Johns Hopkins University, the Manhattan Institute for Public Policy Research, and the Project for the New American Century (PNAC). 'The Foundation also gives large sums of money to promote conservative programs in the country's most prestigious colleges and universities.'<3> (http://www.mediatransparency.org/funderprofile.php?fund... )<4> (http://www.jmof.org/history_purposes.html )<5> (http://www.jmof.org/grants_1996.html )"

6). Smith Richardson Foundation:

http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Smith_Richar...

"The Smith Richardson Foundation is financed by the Vicks Vaporub fortune. The Foundation reported assets of $494 million in 2001 and gave away $23 million.

"The Foundation became active in supporting conservative causes in 1973 when R. Richardson Randolph became its president. Forbes estimates the Richardsons to have a net worth of $870 million, which makes it one of the U.S.'s richest families.<1> (http://www.mediatransparency.org/funderprofile.php?fund... )

"The Foundation funded the early 'supply-side' books of Jude Wanniski and George Gilder. It is also listed in the acknowledgements for Dennis King's study of the LaRouche movement, Lyndon LaRouche and the New American Fascism (1989).

"Grantees The Foundation gave approximately $99,686,911 to a total of 266 grantees. Conservative think tanks that received substantial sums were:

Center for Strategic and International Studies, $3,135,061
American Enterprise Institute, $2,942,532
Paul H. Nitze School of Advanced International Studies (SAIS) at John Hopkins; $2,680,334
Brookings Institute, $2,629,870
RAND Corporation, $1,854,061
Hudson Institute, $1,595,510
National Institute for Public Policy, $1,534,334
Urban Institute, $1,492,624
Freedom House, Inc., $1,109,500
Council on Foreign Relations, $883,023"

***

Progressive Policy Institute

http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Progressive_...

"The Progressive Policy Institute (PPI) was established in 1989 "and after the 1992 election gained notoriety as 'Bill Clinton's idea mill.'" PPI is the think tank of the Democratic Leadership Council (DLC), founded in 1985 by PPI's President, Will Marshall, and counts among its past chairs former President Bill Clinton, Congressman Richard Gephardt, and Senator Joseph I. Lieberman. <1> (http://www.followthenetwork.org/groupprofile.asp?grpid=... )

"Mission **** Note influence of THIRD WAY THINKING! ****

"The Progressive Policy Institute is a catalyst for political change. Its mission is to modernize progressive politics and government for the Information Age. Leaving behind the stale left-right debates of the industrial era, PPI is a prolific source of 'Third Way' thinking that is shaping the emerging politics of the 21st century." <2> (http://www.ppionline.org /)

"Funding: **** Note the dubious "left-wing" supportive Harry Bradley Foundation! See #1 under funding for The Third Way Foundation! ****

"According to Follow the Network, "PPI receives relatively little direct foundation sponsorship: most of the money PPI has received (about $300,000) has come from the Lynde and Harry Bradley Foundation, which contributes to a variety of both leftwing and conservative foundations. Additional PPI money has come from the BP Foundation, the AT&T Foundation (http://www.followthenetwork.org/funderProfile.asp?fndid... ), the Eastman Kodak Charitable Trust, and the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation (http://www.followthenetwork.org/funderprofile.asp?fndid... )." <3> (http://www.followthenetwork.org/groupprofile.asp?grpid=... )

http://rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/1534

http://www.dkosopedia.com/index.php?title=Progressive_P...

***

DLC:

http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Democratic_L...


http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x2445516

[Name removed]

116. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Sheepshank]

122. self delete

seems like Hamsher is the darling at DU...pity.

[slipslidingaway]

123. Where does Daily Kos get their revenue, where does DU get their revenue ...

maybe all sites to disclose all their finances, is that a good idea.

:shrug:

In edit, I recommended this thread for full disclosure.

[Whisp]

124. Jane Hamsher doesn't have syphillis (as far as I know) but she is an asshole.

Jane Hamsher is an asshole. Did I mention?

[Name removed]

127. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[wndycty]

129. Wow!

:kick:

[dionysus]

148. i didn't quite catch that. come again?

:rofl:

[Name removed]

125. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[flamingdem]

130. REC Hamster, caught in her spinning wheel

Full disclosure! :popcorn:

[Tx4obama]

135. self-delete

Yep, I should have read the whole article on the DU link that I posted and I didn't. My bad.

[TriMera]

136. Self-delete.

[SoDesuKa]

137. And Lawyers are PAID by CRIMINALS

Hamsher's allowed to make a living; what's the big deal? Lawyers represent actual criminals; in some cases, some lawyers represent some really undesirable characters.

The underlying premise is that Hamsher ought to show loyalty to the party by turning away clients. I don't agree.

[flamingdem]

139. At least some people put their money where their mouth is

as they say, but she uses her mouth to badmouth and now her forked tongue is in question.

[SoDesuKa]

141. Independent Wealth

Sounds like you want progressive bloggers to be independently wealthy. However, if they were indpendently wealthy, it's unlikely that they'd be all that progressive.

See my post calling for a government subsidized blogosphere. That would put a stop to all these innuendoes.

[inna]

138. beyond pathetic

[SidDithers]

151. ...

:puke:

Sid

[Name removed]

142. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[JTFrog]

144. Well there is something I can agree with.

The new DU is indeed a cesspool.

[dionysus]

147. i know, instead of posting smear pieces against obama 24/7, someone went after st jane.

terrible i tell's ya!

:rofl:

[wndycty]

149. Yeah I am the problem. . .LOL

Some of this stuff is just fricking laughable.

[dionysus]

150. WHY DO YOU DO THIS TO US!!1! *sob*

:rofl:
:hi:

[wndycty]

152. LOL

:kick:

[Name removed]

153. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[wndycty]

154. Yup. . .she can talk shit about anyone, but don't you dare say anything bad about her

:kick:

[JTFrog]

155. LOL!

*poof*

This thread is cracking me up.

:kick:

[Name removed]

143. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[wndycty]

146. Wednesday morning kick

:kick:

[JackRiddler]

159. So wndycty, why in the OP did you snip out the byline of the piece?

Is Dana Houle not a presentable author?

[KamaAina]

161. Someone called that a Rovian hit piece. What's up with that?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=439&topic_id=1340401&mesg_id=1345120

[JackRiddler]

163. Check out this very thread starting at Post #69...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=439x1337889#1338596

[POET1938]

162. STARS AND STRIPES AND KINDLIER GRIPES, UTUBE, LYRICS BY 73-YEAR-OLD GREAT-GRAM

STARS AND STRIPES AND KINDLIER GRIPES,UTUBE, LYRICS BY 73-YEAR-OLD GREAT-GRANDMOTHER

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uSRjwR3vwl4


STARS AND STRIPES (and kindlier gripes)

Words and Music by Alice Connally Fisk (ASCAP) and Richard Melvin Brown (Socan)

Give us stars for our right to assemble
and for free speech in venting our spleen
doesn't matter at all our political stripes --
the far left, the far right, in-between

There's the usual Dems and Republicans
but branching out further from there
at each end of our widening spectrum
complex heartfelt issues all air

Deep concerns leave many quite angry
bitter rivals won't always sway
but our mainstream agree that malice is not
the truly American Way

So let us have cooler behavior
our forefathers now remind...
spiteful action is quite far beneath us
in a nation intrinsically kind

Let vitriol fall by the wayside
fine manners once again flair
Agree to respectfully disagree on
common good & what's basically fair.

Opponents debating each other
minus hate in our land of the free
with One great and timeless reminder
Love of neighbor has always been key

Our empathy's ever praised worldwide
we're admired for our caring so true
'neath our own stars and stripes
let's have kindlier gripes
for our beautiful Red, White and Blue.

[e-mail]

[JackRiddler]

164. Hey wndycty, why don't you tell us... was there a reason you cut out the author's byline from OP?

[wndycty]

165. No there was no reason, you can try to assign a motive. . .but as you can see I provided. . .

. . .a link to the piece. . .anymore questions?

[JackRiddler]

167. Naming the author is the most basic element of citation.

Unintentional, I'm sure, but omitting the author can raise suspicion when it turns out the author is even more of a dirty politics operator than you imagine Hamsher to be.

[Capn Sunshine]

168. Are they dirty because you don't like what they say?

Does that make Jane pure as the driven snow? DU has been played for suckers for two years. I think exploiting the fatalist notions here pretty calculated.