Rise of a new political beast of burden : The "unaffiliated" political promoter

It seems republicans have hatched a new kind of avertising political consultant : the "non-affiliaited" political advertiser. That's the kind of (usually) guy that manages to be throw away hundreds of thousands of dollars in "unaffiliated" advertising for the candidates of their choice.

First example up : Bob J. Perry liked so much his swiftboating of John Kerry that he is at it again:

A new television commercial that targets Democratic Senate ca didate Ned Lamont as a "tax-hiking liberal" is being aired by a tax-exempt adv cacy group funded by a major Republican donor from Texas who worked with White House political guru.

That funder, Bob J. Perry, also was the chief financial backer of Swift Boat Vets and POWs for Truth, another tax-exempt organization that attacked the reputation of U.S. Sen. John Kerry of Massachusetts in the 2004 presidential election.

Lest you dismiss this as an opportunity for the guy to bask in the Lamont glow, it seems he is targetting candidates supported by DailyKos : the guy is also throwing money for advertising against Patricia Madrid, who is in a tight race against the republican incumbent for New Mexico's CD-1, Heather Wilson.

Meanwhile Capitol Annex is reporting that in Michigan, a little known doctor by the name Andrew Messenger is spreading the wealth much in the same way:

 

Messenger’s expenditures raise a number of questions including why the heretofore unknown retired doctor is plucking down such a significant amount of cash in Paul’s district. Also, the manner in which Messenger’s ad buy was made raises further questions about whether or not the expenditures were truly unknown to the Paul campaign before they were made.

The ads were placed using a Maryland political consulting and communications firm, Jay Bryant Communications Consluting. Jay Bryant and his company have done work for Paul previously, having managed media buys and consulted for the campaign in 2002 [Disbursment page including Bryant expenditure from Paul report [http://www.capitolannex.com/misc/BRYANT.gif|here]].

According to records obtained by Capitol Annex, Bryant and his company placed the ads for Messenger and received a commission-discounted price.

Efforts to locate a telephone number for Bryant were unsuccessful.

The connection between an unknown Michigan physician and Bryant are unknown. It seems more than odd that the physician would select Bryant’s firm by chance, given that it has done work for Paul’s campaigns in the past.

 Still people dare to claim bloggers are the perfect loophole for "unclaimed" campaign contributions. 

 Feh. 

 

 

 

 

 


liza's picture

| | | | | | | |


Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
theflipflopgirl's picture

Flip flop my way to the Voting Booth

I think the best thing that could happen for all involved is that the Democrats take back the House and Senate. We then get a balance of power. This might even help Bush by tempering his actions and maybe helping to start the long road to undoing all the bad he has done to our country.


liza's picture

you know, i wish i could say i agree with you

but given how conservative some of the candidates are, i gotta wonder. i mean, c'mon, we have Mary Landrieu in the Democratic party, a woman who has one of the worse pro-choice records in the senate.

sincerely, as i have never been too keen about drinking of the liberal kool-aid, i am being cautious about this "take back congress" optimism.

yes, having more democrats will be good. a country deserves the candidates they elect. there's so many democrat switchers being pushed as "good democrats", that it makes me wary. if people in the netroots honestly believe that getting conservative democrats will somehow bring balance, a have a bridge i want to sell you.

we need more than seats. we need progressives who can inspire a cultural shift in the way we pass legislation and do politics in this country. where are they because, i ain't seeing them.


Visit our sponsors

Fill up our coffee fund

BlogAds

Buy it!


Visit our sponsors

Get our Digestifs du jour

Nibble daily on our brainy goodness with our daily syndication digest. You'll receive an email with a list and links to the previous day's posts.



Powered by FeedBlitz

culturekitchens

The Publisher
Liza Sabater

Daily servings of political dissent
culturekitchen

Grassroots News and
Activism for New Yorkers

Daily Gotham

Feminist Bloggers
Network

BlogSheroes

A new kind of vouyerism
Voogling

Art + Code + Philosophy
Potatoland.blog

Got any dirt, tips, leads or money for us? Then drop us a line or two at editors [at] culturekitchen [dot] com or use our general contact form to reach everybody in the editorial team ASAP.


Member's articles and stories

More stories

Google Ads

The Big Dialog


Who's online

There are currently 1 user and 779 guests online.

Online users

Instant Congress

Don't know your Senators or US Representatives' phone numbers?
Enter your street address and zip code and find out right now.
Street number and name only:
Zip Code (5 digits):


Upcoming events

  • no upcoming events available

Words to live by

But, when it came down to, this case was made into a racial issue, which it shouldn't have been. It should have been an issue about a woman who was raped by three men. Case closed.

The fact that she was black and they were white only plays into the fetishization of Black women and white men that has developed through years of inequal treatment. This also biased many people because it made this case into a national spectacle. It split people along racial lines instead of factual lines and investigating the story that the woman told instead of going on a witch hunt.

Additionally, this case was turned into an issue of class as well. The Black, poor woman was raped by the rich white kids. Many wanted to see these men be charged because they felt it would put them in their rightful place, strip them of the privilege that they had been so accustomed to all of their lives.

All of the things that this case stood for are all of the things that were wrong with the media's coverage of the case, the national obsession with the case, and the prosecution of the case. It became an issue of stripping privilege and proving that white people were not superior instead of ensuring that this woman was actually treated properly and had her CORRECT assailants brought to justice, not for political reasons but for criminal reasons.


Subscribe Buttons

Feed IconGoogleDeliciousYahoo!BloglinesNewsgatorMSNFeedsterAOLFurlRojoNewsburstPluckFeedFeedsAdd KinjaMultiRSSrMailRSSFwdBlogarithmSimplify