October 18, 2006

Jon Tester: Funded by Hate

In the wake of the Mike Rogers attempt to "out" a conservative senator (using conveniently anonymous sources, of course) and the overwhelming support the practice of "outing" has among the rabid left wing, Dan Riehl comes out on the offensive against Democratic politicians that seem more than willing to profit from hate:

If you think this is a small matter, I'd argue you're wrong. In total, from swimming in a sea of hate that responded to the death of innocent contractors in Iraq with ">"screw 'em">" prominent Democrat candidates have profited to the tune of $3.5 Million dollars. Below are just a few.

Last I looked, Tester running in Montana had half a million dollars in the bank. Half of those dollars came from a Netroots web now claiming an Idaho Senator is a homosexual three weeks before an election, as if it's anyone's business besides his, even if he were.

Is that the type of Democrat Tester is running as in Montana? Lamont is an empty suit, but he had no trouble filling his pockets with $400k from the very same source. And what of Jim Webb? Does he have a position on Gays in the military? Perhaps it's out.

DNC Chair Howard Dean, Senators Barbara Boxer and Harry Reid, among others, traveled to Nevada to solicit support and lavish praise on the same individual whose blog is now featuring the clearest example of homophobic-laced hate in politics I've ever seen. Even today, they are raising money for a so-called expanded field.

The Democrat Party built this network and that blog. They funded it with advertising, many, including John Kerry, have written copy for it and fueled its rage. And they reaped the fruit of that rage in dollars and in hype.

Both parties have their share of those filled with hate, and I don't think that is in dispute. Nor do I think that a politician or his campaign can thoroughly research all of their small contributors to weed out and refuse contributions from those with extremist ideas. It simply isn't feasible.

But candidates such as Jon Tester, who has apparently received half of his funding from the extreme left wing of the blogosphere that overwhelming supports outing as a political tool, shouldn't have that excuse.

National Democratic leaders such as Harry Reid and Barbara Boxer should not be lavishing praise on a blogger that seemed to reveal in the death of American security contractors like Scott Helvenston, a former Navy SEAL that was among four contractors killed, burned, and mutilated trying to help Eurest Support Services deliver food shipments to American troops.

Some on the right responded to their deaths by creating scholarship funds. Some on the left responded with an enthusiastic "screw 'em"":

Every death should be on the front page (2.70 / 40)

Let the people see what war is like. This isnít an Xbox game. There are real repercussions to Bushís folly.

That said, I feel nothing over the death of merceneries [sic]. They arenít in Iraq because of orders, or because they are there trying to help the people make Iraq a better place. They are there to wage war for profit. Screw them.

by kos on Thu Apr 1st, 2004 at 12:08:56 PDT

On the other hand, perhaps Jon Tester is aware of the politics of those that support him. They are, after all, among his largest financial supporters. By taking such large contributions from the Kossacks, perhaps "screw them" is a message Jon Tester, Harry Reid, and Barbara Boxer are willing to stand behind.

Posted by Confederate Yankee at October 18, 2006 08:22 AM | TrackBack

And I'm sure you'll also denounce Sean Hannity, who just two nights ago, defended Melanie Morgan and her co-author's claim in their new book that Cindy Sheehan had an affair with Lew Rockwell and is "addicted to online porn." Let's hear some more from Bush supporters about how terrible it is that the "left" is using private sexual behavior for political gain and exposing people who enter the public arena to such terrible, invasive scrutiny.

Posted by: Ed at October 18, 2006 10:22 AM

Hey "Ed", I thought democrats weren't about the exposing the privacy of someone else's sex life. Right? See the point of the post now, smart guy?

Posted by: bri at October 18, 2006 10:42 AM

It's simply quite erroneous to make Tester responsible for the words of every one of his supporters and donors. And even if one would hold him to that standard, one would have to hold every candidate to that standard, of all political parties.

So, just don't do it. If you don't like Mike Rodgers , fine. But Tester and Rodgers are not the same people.

Posted by: Jaxebad at October 18, 2006 11:23 PM

Your tactics have sharp teeth when they come back to bite, don't they?

Don't ask, don't tell, unless you're a democrat looking for advantage.

Posted by: Mike H. at October 19, 2006 11:25 PM