Tuesday, February 24, 2009
Politics / Woods Freeman Voted Republican in '02 and '06, Records Show
Posted by Jeff Woods on Tue, Feb 24, 2009 at 10:10 AM
Comments (24)
Showing 1-24 of 24
like
dislike
Barack Obama's National Finance Chair, Penny Pritzer, donated $1000 to Bush in 1999, $1000 to McCain in 1999, $1000 to Giuliani in 2000, $4000 to Joe Lieberman in 2006, and $1000 to Bush in 2003. There are also sizable donations to folks like Dennis Hastert and Bill Inglis.
Would anyone question Penny Pritzker's commitment to Democratic causes after her work raising gazillions of dollars for Obama?
Sorry, folks, but this just doesn't matter much. The sad part is that you're wasting time on this when we've got real issues to address like a billion dollar deficit.
By the way, what does Ward Cammack think about Freeman's past history?
Figures. What else would we expect from a guy who helped fund TNGOP attacks late in the 2006 election cycle.
By clicking on this line, you can view a PDF the Tennessee Republican Party’s Federal Election Commission report for the period ending Oct. 18, 2006. On page 11, you’ll see Freeman gave $10,000 on Oct. 3, 2006. (Thanks, Bill!) Then scrolling down, you can see the various “causes” that Freeman’s gift help fund during that reporting period, including: $1,000 to the Tennessee Conservative Union; $2,750 to the Campaign to Elect Joe Carr (who nearly beat then-Rep. John Hood that year and now serves in state House); and a whopping $12,500 to Bryson for Governor. Maybe not coincidentally, some three weeks after Freeman’s gift to the TNGOP (and the TNGOP’s transfer to Bryson), Bryson put up a despicable TV ad blaming immigrants for murdering innocent people on Tennessee’s roads and highways.
The simple reality is, this man has hurt Democrats and Democratic principles. Anyone who supports him should be ashamed.
Apparently, this sofware scrubs links. But you can cut and paste the belowlink to view the TNGOP report:
http://query.nictusa.com/pdf/672/26940549672/26940549672.pdf#navpanes=0
BenInTotalDenial: Penny Pritzer or Pritzker or whoever she is does not serve as treasurer of the DEMOCRATIC Party. Who cares what Ward Cammack does? You and your fellow Chipinista are running from the simple fact that the Democratic Party exists to elect Democrats. And Freeman, with his Republican giving, sought to actively undermine Democrats including Harold Ford Jr. Stop being a tool for the man and own up to the fact that you got played.
The Republicans can't elect a speaker of the house without botching it and the Democrats manage to elect a state chair without the support of any of the elected powers that be in the state and install a state treasurer who is a Republican. And we've got a lazy Governor. What is wrong with politics in Tennessee?
Hey, at least we'll be able to pack heat at Radnor Lake, right?
Oh please. Chip is trapped. He tries to mend fences with the governor's office, and they tell him to go to hell. So he turns to Odom and Freeman, and the governor's office screams. What's he supposed to do? And why do Democrats need to know anything about Freeman except that he can raise money? Fundraisers are whores by definition. If they weren't whores, they wouldn't be good fundraisers. Judge Freeman by how much money he raises.
I'd ordinarily agree with you except this little charlatan Chip ran on a pledge to rain hellfire and brimstone down on the racist Republicans and banish them from the land. Now he gets his ass in a financial sling and the first person he runs to is some faux/nouveaux Democrat who has spent the better part of the last few years underwriting all these allegedly Republican racist activities that's got Chip's thong panties in a wad. Chip can be pristine and pure and a great defender of the House of D. Or he can be another slimy pol with another greasy fundraiser. But he can't be both.
The problem with Freeman isn't Freeman, it's Forrester. As a practical matter his votes in the GOP primary can be explained, perhaps not excused, but explained, and his donations to GOP candidates can be explained, and again not necessarily excused.
The issue is Forrester's judgment on this one. The True Believers were sure to be hacked once Freeman's past came to light, and Forrester certainly should have known that the guv's camp would not be happy.
Why pick a guy that no one would like? He may be able to make it rain and pour champagne but does Forrester really need the headache that comes with it? Unnecessary distraction.
Woods, uh, Dems may not *need* to know about Freeman's past, but what makes you think they (we) wouldn't want to know?
Well, if you're going to limit your fundraisers to the ideologically pure, you're not going to raise any money.
Well, if you're going to limit your fundraisers to the ideologically pure, you're not going to raise any money.
exactly
the Democratic Party exists to elect Democrats
And a fundraiser exists to raise funds.
In the first week of October 2006, Freeman gave the TNGOP $10,000. That very same week, the TNGOP sent out a racist mailer against Harold Ford, Jr. (see Knoxville News Sentinel article below).
Chip Forrester claimed he would call out Republican racism whenever he saw it. Looks like that doesn't include racism that was funded by his treasurer.
Forrester is just another whore politican. Principles don't matter. Only money matters.
---
Baptist leader questions GOP's Ford photo
By TOM HUMPHREY, Tomhumphrey3@aol.com
October 11, 2006
NASHVILLE — The use of a "dark, distorted picture" of Harold Ford Jr. in a Republican fundraising appeal had racial overtones even if it was not intentionally altered, according to a Baptist ethics leader.
An editorial criticizing the mailer was posted today by Robert Parham, executive director of the Baptist Center for Ethics in Nashville, on the center's Web site, www.ethicsdaily.com.
Parham said he discussed the issue with both Republican and Democratic party officials after seeing a News Sentinel story last week on the questioned photo and fundraising letter.
Those discussions, he said, left some ambiguity about alterations.
Democratic officials, including state Chairman Bob Tuke, say the picture was obviously altered to darken Ford's complexion and the letter included racial "code words."
Tuke said Tuesday that Republicans in the mailing are "appealing to the basest insticts among some of their constituencies" in soliciting funds.
Chris Devaney, executive director of the state Republican party, renewed his defense of the fundraising appeal and said it was "irresponsible, baseless and reckless" for Democrats to try making an issue of the it.
Ford himself, in response to a question about the fundraising appeal, said he did not want to "dignify it with a response." But Ford said he expects Republicans "to get deeper and deeper into the gutter" because GOP U.S. Senate nominee Bob Corker is "a confused candidate."
"Normally, when you're confused, you do things you regret," said Ford.
Corker spokesman Todd Womack said the campaign had nothing to do with the letter.
Devaney said the original picture came from a Ford Web site, where it appears in color, and was printed in black and white simply to save costs on printing of the fundraising appeal. Printing in color is considerably more expensive, he said.
"I know that nothing was ever intentionally altered or doctored. That is just something we would never engage in," Devaney said.
Parham, in the editorial, says that without regard to alteration, there is still the question of "what would prompt Republican leaders to run such a dark, distorted picture of Ford in their fund-raising letter in the first place.
"Even if Republicans didn't alter the picture, the picture looked far darker than the one they said they took from Ford's Web site. The only plausible reason to use such a picture is to play the race card — in an effort to frighten and fire up white voters in a key senatorial race," the editorial says.
"In the black-and-white world of right and wrong, Republican leaders have flatly done wrong," the editorial says.
"Whether they acted with malice or moral callousness doesn't really matter. The end result is race as a wedge issue," it says.
The editorial says that the matter provides a chance for pastors and other church leaders to go beyond condemning racism and promoting racial harmony "in the abstract." It continues:
"The Ford photograph affords a concrete opportunity for Tennessee's moral leaders to offer a swift rebuke of racism or the appearance of racism in a fund-raising letter. Racism anywhere is a threat to race relations everywhere. Racial reconciliation anywhere advances race relations everywhere."
Well, if you're going to limit your fundraisers to the ideologically pure, you're not going to raise any money.
You're not just talking about a "fundraiser" but someone holding a title and exercising judgment.
Perhaps it would have been best to have Freeman as just a "fundraiser" and not "Treasurer."
That's bullshit, Mark. Freeman is dialing for dollars. Which is a lot more than most treasurers have ever done. In the past, it's been a bookkeeping kind of thing, and that's it. It's a volunteer job. Look, I appreciate people's efforts to make the party stand for something. That's great. But if you're a Democrat who cares about winning elections, you have to admit this is getting out of hand.
Well, Woods, I agree with Mark that the problem is Chip. He ran for chair as an "outsider" a "non-politician." He specifically argued against his opponent as strictly a money guy. Chip claimed the TNDP wasn't just about money anymore.
His supporters bought it. Turns out that was a lie. Chip is all about money just like any party chair. This isn't a philosophical discussion. This is a discussion about a specific party chair, Chip Forrester.
Some people sent out warnings that Chip is dishonest, but his supporters ignored those warnings. Seems some of them regret it now.
"Chip is all about money just like any party chair?" Right. He BETTER be about money or he won't be able to do anything. Reality, I wonder about you. I do. Your facility at talking out of both sides of your mouth is a wonder to behold. I think you are one of the ones who said Forrester was too liberal; he gets a conservative Democrat who has crossed the aisle to give, and you have a problem with that.
You apparently have a problem with Forrester, who I have known a long time and never found to be dishonest.
I have a bigger problem with Democrats who are needlessly stirring this pot: what do they/you hope to gain? Gray Sasser is one who ran up a huge legal bill and left the party in a mess. Try to blame the Kurita thing on Forrester, but that totally absolves the former chair of any responsibility. So I guess you are saying Forrester was running the show and Sasser was sitting around clueless? Well, the last part makes sense, anyway.
Jackson, I don't have a dog in the Forrester v. Sasser fight, so I'll leave that alone My issue here isn't conservative v. liberal either.
My issue is honesty. I'm pointing out the fact that Forrester claimed he was going to run a transparent party, and he isn't. Did he tell you that Freeman is a Republican contributor before he made him treasurer? Did he tell anyone? Now that the story has broken, Forrester has given at least three different excuses for Freeman's GOP contributions. That's not being open and honest.
As for his honesty, has Forrester ever told you about his discussions with Al Gore when Forrester decided to run against Bob Clement? You should ask him.
Reality shines a bit of light on an episode that hasn't been covered much in the run-up to the Dem chair election: The debacle when Chip bolted Gore's staff to challenge Clement. Left bad blood that lingers today with all the Gore folks and all the Clement folks. Showed bad, bad judgment on Chip's part. Again, there are reasons why the key elected officials in this state were opposed to CF becoming party chair. Lots of good scoop there if someone (Woods?) want to delve into it.
Reality, I wouldn't ask Forrester. He has consistently lied about that whole episode with Gore. I would ask someone who was there -- someone who worked for Gore at the time. I am sure there are several of them still in Nashville.
Woods
It isn't bullshit, not in this instance especially. Do I really have to explain what titles and symbols mean to The True Believers, the ones who come in after work and lick freakin envelopes for two hours? I'm one who can separate my philosophy and my pragmatism for the sake of party politics, but part of that pragmatism means recognizing what certain things mean to certain people. To people who aren't as well schooled as you, the title "treasurer" means something. You don't have to genuflect to those people but you do have to recognize what they do for the party.
You don't really have to be that schooled to know that a faction of folks were going to be mad chuffed when the contributions and the votes were exposed.
As to whether I think it's gotten out of hand, the fact that I called it an unnecessary distraction should answer.
Yeah, I know all about Chip leaving Gore's office. He went to Chicago to meet the then Senator, who was making a speech, and told Gore he was resigning to run against Clement. I was pretty involved at the time, so I also know there are a few former Gores staff people who don't like Chip and spin it a certain way - and a few who were helping him behind the scenes.
