Go Terps!

You dissapoint me AC.

Well, the guy who owes me is someone who I helped get his first product cleared through FDA when I was a mediator at the Agency. He looked me up when he made $25 million on the product to say Thanks. That's when I learned he graduated Duke. Since I don't work for the govt anymore, he can buy me a tee shirt the 2 or 3 times since then (10 years?) that the Terps have swept Duke.  I still think he got the better deal.

Back to Davis...what is he going to do with no war chest for the Senate? He spent it all against Hurst in 2006. Is he going to let his wife spend it all on her campaign or will she be put on a spending budget?

Does sound like a good deal on his part, and it's nice to see a Duke grad more successful in business than Rick Wagoner. Terps look very good this year, Gary really has them peaking at the right time.

On the topic, I don't beleive for a second that Warner is running again. Here's why:
1. He's in the minority, and he will likely stay there for the forseeable future
2. He can no longer serve as Chairman of the Armed Services Committee
3. He's 80 years old; while there are older Senators, they haven't face competitive elections recently
4. Barring our perpetual ability as a party to screw things up, it's likely he won't have the President's ear in 2008
5. He hasn't faced a competitive election since 96 and his campaign skills through Kilgore/Allen events were not overwhelming
6. If the GOP is to have any future in NOVA, they needs Davis to run for that seat to get indepdents there to vote GOP again

I think his early move was a pump fake to scare off Dems, while telling Davis to get ready. I still don't think Warner has any interest in the seat, so who do we get to run against Davis? Beyer? Deeds?

Here's a dark horse: How about John Grisham? He's bright, served for 8 years as a Democrat in the Mississippi House of Representatives, and we've had good luck with 'fiction' writers : )

... about John Warner retiring and Davis running.

Some RK folks might want to lend their expertise to James L. at Swing State Project, who has a post about VA-11 and the Senate race that I'm sure he'd appreciate comments on.

I am personally and professionally associated with the individual in this picture.  He is one of the most ethical and upstanding people I know. 

They took down the picture - because he is no longer the President.  Ever heard of content updating?  You act like people cannot meet and be in business and or associated in the Capital.  Stick to the important things that you have reported regarding dragging out legislation and not trying to implicate innocent people.

Please stop with some kind of gotta ya.  Because he was the President of an Association, it is an association just like any other, like the Nurses association.  Not all Lobbyist are Jack Abramoff.  Many respectible Democratic affliates are lobbist (Harris Miller) come to mind?

So stop with painting other individuals with some kind of broad brush because you have an issue with Tom Davis.

But Tom Davis and Jack Abramoff worked together at the RNCC. Tom DeLay "loaned" Tom Davis his staffers to "hammer" Republicans for voting for Davis as Committee Cair when they wanted Chris Shays, according to the Hill newspaper. Tom Delay, Abramoff, and Davis hired Dan Mattoon to work as Davis's #2 man at the RNCC as their go-between.  They shook down these lobbyists with the "K Street Project" for money to allow them to write their own laws and regulations.  The "education" was one-sided.  Consumer groups and non-profits did not ante up and were not invited to the table.

The groups deleted all events, including recent 2006 events, and wiped the cache of any photos with legislators.

They don't look too proud of their "educational" activities.

It's a shame lobbying now has a bad name, because whenever we write or call our legislators, we lobby them and that's okay. But the real shame is when anyone who can't pay up gets only lip service.  I'm sure the families and firends of the men and women in deplorable conditions at Walter Reed "lobbied" their Congressional reps. Perhaps they needed to hire a lobbyist.

I am not sure why you are pushing so hard to implicate the whole industry and association?  Was Abramoff a member?  Was the organization indicted and or complacent in any of his wrong doings?  Was it the lobbying industry the ones pushing the K street project?  Or was it Delay and Davis.

And if you take a minute it is a new web site with new content.  Whether or not they have taken down pictures with legislators is really not relevant to the issue of you painting a broad brush and again trying to implicate an individual with another crook.

You are implicating the individual in the picture with those two.  So I would ask that you not do that.  AGAIN - the individual that you have slander by posting his photo has nothing to do with Tom Davis and Jack Abramoff and I ask that you take down the picture.

You slander me by acusing me of slander. Tom Davis is a public figure, this is a truthful meeting and an undoctored photo. The activities of Tom Delay, Tom Davis, and Jack Abramoff with the NRCC and the K Street Project involving lobbyists are public record. Their meetings at Abramoff's restaurant, Signatures, and at this event pictured are public record. This photo was posted voluntarily by the ALLDC and President Paul Miller.
Truthful public information about public figures is not slander.
By your logic, Tom Davis and Paul Miller should be proud of their meeting to exchange educational information, and there would be no slander. Please explain the slander, and if this is slander, or even just inappropriate, it can be deleted.

I am referring to you indicting Mr. Miller with the Abramoff and lobbist scandel because he had a picture with Mr. DAvis.

AGain - I give two shits about DAvis, Delay and Abramoff - but what I do give a shit about is you thinking it is okay to implicant Mr. Miller because he had a picture taken with Davis over four years ago.

look at your highlighted post.  You implied in so many words that the person in the picture was just as guilty as Abramoff.  I would be happy to go around with you and around with you on this issue.  But because someone has chosen to have a picture with AN ELECTED OFFICIAL does not make them a crook.

You did this before in another diary with the same photo.  That time I thought - you know that kind of makes me mad - because I know Paul and respect him totally.

She is trying to imply that because he had a photo (which I have a lot of photos with elected people) if you go to any office in DC it is filled with these kind of photos.  That she is associated Paul with Davis and because he is a lobbist he is equal to Abramoff.

So again - if I look in the archieves I can find the exact same photo with the exact same kind of implied link with Davis, Delay and Abramoff against Mr. Miller.

If you have some issue with Mr. Miller than that is fine - the implied association to wrong doing is not!  That my friend is slander.  His livelyhood is linked to his reputation, you even implying wrong doing by association is slander.... Mr. Miller is not a public figure.

I have no problem with Miller--Harris or Paul Miller. Everyone has a right to have their case made zealously by an eloquent spokeman, including a lobbyist. I know lots who work with companies and clients quietly and behind the scenes to bring them into compliance, including those who do this while suffering from the clients outward behavior.

Perhaps your high regard for Paul Miller raises your vigilence for potential slurs against him. That is understandable.  But your assumption that Paul Miller has a black eye because he is photographed with Davis is only one way to interpret this picture, and not the way I intended.  Davis is the one that has the black eye, and I'll explain why.

Under the K Street Project, it was the Republican Congressmen who had taken the intiative to demand that the lobbyists go back to their clients and solicit donations. The lobbyists didn't invent this scheme. They had to decide to play along or lose their arguments not on the merits, and potentially lose clients to those competitors who did play along with the RNCC.

At a 2004 meeting at Signatures, where Tom Davis was likely present, the lobbyists were reminded that they had their K Street jobs because of RNCC members and were told to produce more money for them.  The meeting was repeated in 2006 with new RNCC Chair and Davis mentee, Tom Reynolds.

An eggregious example of a pay-to-play Congressman shaking down lobbyists is Duke Cunningham; but Cunningham's problem was he was stupid enough to put his "shopping list" in writing. Davis was excellent at this without putting it in writing. He started a "$100,000 club" at the RNCC. He spread the word about connections between donations and writing your own legislation. He worked with Dan Mattoon, the Abramoff/DeLay go-between at the RNCC. According to the Hill newspaper, Chris Shays was passed over for a Reform Committee Chairmanship to reward Davis for "sticking up" the lobbying community. Davis and his wife further profited handsomely from the Chairmanship to sell "get out of jail free" cards to government contractors.

In that respect, lobbyists were the victims being shaken down. Just as the people who could only get a fair hearing from the Reform committee by hiring ICG and Davis's wife for "hearing preparation consulting."

From his writings, Paul Miller does seem to be a voice condemning this practice.  Perhaps he said no to the robbery and worked from the inside, and out, to condemn it and contain it.  The fact that Tom Davis was unsuccessful in corrupting him with ill-gotten influence and millions of dollars is admirable.

and working closely with Congress on multiple occasions to address many of the issues that Delay and Abramoff has placed a shadow on their carrers. 

Paul Miller, the A.L.L. President photographed with Davis, has testified several times for higher lobbying standards, as totallynext has suggested.

John Aravosis at Americablog asks this about the Walter Reed scandal: http://americablog.b...

Where is the House Veterans Affairs Committee? Not a word about this scandal on their Web site home page. In the Senate, the head of the Senate Veterans Affairs Committee, Daniel Akaka (D-HI), issued a statement expressing concern over the Walter Reed abuses, and saying that he will be holding hearings in March on this issue and others. That's great. But it would be nice to hear from the chairman about what he plans to do right now about Mr. Kiley.

And where are the Republican members of Congress? You remember them, the folks who claim, early and often, to care so much about our troops. Why have almost all of them, save Bill Young (R-FL) and Tom Davis (R-VA), been so silent on this matter? And before you give Young and Davis a pass, they were in CHARGE of oversight on this matter while the Republicans controlled congress. Where were they while our soldiers were sleeping in their own urine? Why did Congressman Young go silent for two years after finding out about these atrocities?

I personally think Tom Davis' inaction on the military health scandal has severely damaged him among voters who pay honest attention to issues.  (Notice how carefully qualified that is.)

House Gov't Reform Republicans