Green gets a free pass on ethics
There's quite a remarkable headline and story in today's Journal Sentinel about Rep. Mark Green's election-year conversion on ethics.
Green "has made the subject a key plank in his platform," we're told, and the article points out Green's record of voting for reform in 2006 -- since he became a candidate for governor.
Unfortunately, the author of this puff piece didn't even bother to ask for comment from the other side -- which is in large part what makes this story so remarkable.
Had anyone asked, Jim Doyle's campaign or the Demomcratic party might have pointed out that Green's overall record on ethics still stinks. It seems relevant:
-- That most of the $1.3-million Green laundered into his governor's race from his Congressional campaign committee came from special interests.
-- That, as the Dems highlighted earlier, Green has taken big contributions from Big Oil and the pharmaceutical industry, then voted for bills to put billions of dollars in their pockets.
-- That Green didn't lift a finger when the Republicans who control the Assembly decided to kill ethics reform at the end of the legislative session. What kind of leadership did Green exhibit when 55 of 60 Assembly Republicans voted against SB-1?
-- That Green has his own ethical problems -- $30,000 in tainted money from ethically challenged Tom DeLay, which Green said he would dispose of, but which is still in his campaign bank account.
-- Plus his connection to the caucus scandal, which was highlighted in Scott Jensen's trial.
-- And Green voted to weaken the House ethics rules to accommodate Tom DeLay and let him stay in leadership even after he was indicted.
Talk about a free ride. It's enough to make you subscribe to the growing theory among Dems that the JS newsroom is endorsing its candidate for governor early, which will have a lot more impact than whatever the editorial board finally decides to do.
UPDATE: Seth Zlotocha says Green is a candidate still looking for an issue.
UPDATE 2: Cory Liebmann on Green's recent conversion.
posted by xoff @ 12:32 PM
7 comments
7 Comments:
Yes, I will tell you how much tribal money went into my pocket as a result of casino negotiations.
Not a penny.
Glad we could clear that up.
At least you know my name, and I don't hide behind any shades.
Nice try at changing the subject, but (a) who are you and (b) what do you have to say about all of the Green ethical transgressions listed in this post?
How do we know you're not just another hack who gets paid to slash away? How do we know you don't work for Mark Green?
I guess the NEWSroom didn't take Journalism 101, or missed the class when they discussed getting both sides of the story.
Shades and Handschke ... a couple more losers who can't run their own blogs with their own comments ... Xoff is under no obligation to tell either of you anything.
And shades, you gave yourself away, you are nothing but a hack.
I admire your chutzpah in saying that, after shade's very first "defense" of Green ignored all of the issues I raised in the post and attacked me personally.
I've been engaged in politics in Wisconsin for 20 years and have never even had a complaint filed against me, so shades' slimy insinuations are just that.
So, guys, are you ready to defend Mark Green's bad record on ethics, or not?
Aww Scott ... I'm sorry if I hurt your feelings.
Fact: DeLay resigned under pressure.
Fact: Dems have urged Jefferson to leave.
Fact: It's Jack.
That's a start. And check out your good buddy neocon bloggers and tell me truthfully that we corner the market on bad language and mean-spiritness (aww). If you can I'll buy you an ice cream cone.
If you can't handle it, don't get involved.
Do you ever get the feeling that most of the trolls here really don't understand what they write? It's like a bunch of indignant fifth-graders debating the civil war with the teacher. And I think we all know which side is arguing for the confederacy...
Post a Comment
<< Home