s skippy the bush kangaroo: taxing revalations

skippy the bush kangaroo



Sunday, July 23, 2006

taxing revalations

we were all set to send a nasty letter to former repubbb connecticut state lawmaker kevin rennie for the first half of his hartford courant column in which he caracitures progressive ned lamont as having conflicts between his investments and a cartoon-like image of hippies and tree huggers:

the lieberman campaign has been trying to shine a light on lamont's investments, which were revealed to the u.s. senate's ethics office in a mandatory report earlier this year. those investments, either directly or in funds, are the normal stuff of democratic outrage. wal-mart, arms manufacturers, satan's own halliburton, starbucks with its unfair coffee purchases in latin america - they all play some part in the enormous lamont family exchequer. it is the stuff with which democrats bludgeon republicans…

lamont concedes in his vague filing only that he is worth between $90 million and $300 million. those numbers would normally be enough to outrage left-wing activists. but this year is different. because he's against the war, it's ok that his fortune is not invested in tofu and ben & jerry's. ideologues make allowances for their own if they take the right stands.
we had just finished a scathing missive to kevin, talking about anti-lieberman resentment boiling beneath the surface of connecticut politics for years (and castigating kevin for cartoons instead of facts), when we decided to read the rest of his column.

lo and behold, kevin gave as good to lieberman as he did to lamont:

this revelatory primary campaign will grow rougher in the next two weeks. the lieberman campaign wants to pose, but declines to answer, uncomfortable questions. for example, why was lieberman's wife, hadassah, working at hill & knowlton in 2005? she is no longer with the lobbying public relations powerhouse, but for a while she served as a senior counselor there on health care issues.

what clients she advised is a well-guarded secret. my attempts to find out specifics went unanswered this past spring and again this past week. the new york observer picked up a thread of the story in a devastating column earlier this month on hill & knowlton's clients and sen. lieberman's cozy relationship with the pharmaceutical industry. (the firm has also represented enron and the saudis.)

these sorts of employment and political relationships are common in washington families, but they can cause questions at home when you are in a primary battle. the campaign declined to answer how the liebermans guarded against conflicts of interests in their jobs.
so, kevin is snarky, but at least he's snarky towards both candidates.
posted by skippy at 1:41 PM |

0 Comments:

Add a comment