 |
 |
   Dan Savage, the brilliant and foul-mouthed sex columnist, has become one of the most important ethicists in America. Are we screwed?
 The federal government is supposed to issue new rules about debt levels for students in for-profit colleges. In the meantime, the states are working on their own regulations.
 Washingtons budget hawks want to decimate the federal workforce to shrink the deficit. It will have the opposite effect.
 There arent nearly enough counterterrorism experts to instruct all of Americas police. So we got these guys instead.
|
   |
|
|
December 28, 2009
STANFORD AND SESSIONS, SITTING IN A TREE.... Sir Allen Stanford is widely recognized as one of the decade's more notorious criminals. The scandal-plagued banker, after all, was allegedly responsible for one of the biggest Ponzi schemes in recent history. Hoping to cultivate power, influence, and credibility, Stanford also had a habit -- before his arrest -- of making close connections with politicians in Washington. The efforts included generous campaign contributions and lavish Caribbean trips. Stanford's investments paid off in 2001, when he used his connections to help kill legislation intended to crack down on offshore tax havens -- a step Stanford had to take to keep secret his corrupt scheme run through an offshore bank in Antigua. With that in mind, federal investigators are interested in knowing if members of Congress did special favors for the alleged Ponzi scheme operator. One lawmaker in particular is likely to receive a fair amount of scrutiny.
Pete Sessions is, of course, the chairman of the National Republican Congressional Committee, the man chiefly responsible for orchestrating the GOP strategy for the 2010 midterm elections. (He's also the same lawmaker who said earlier this year he'd like to see Republicans emulate the Taliban.) Keep in mind, Sessions reached out to Stanford after Stanford was busted by the Securities and Exchange Commission for running a $7 billion Ponzi scheme. Most sane politicians distance themselves from apparent criminals, but this year, the head of the NRCC reached out to an apparent criminal to tell him he loves him. Sessions and Stanford reportedly bonded during a couple of trips to the Caribbean. Asked for comment about his Feb. 17 email, the far-right Republican chose not to respond. —Steve Benen 10:25 AM Permalink | Trackbacks | Comments (18)
Comments
Obama drove them together. This is bad news for the Democrats. Posted by: Conservatroll on December 28, 2009 at 10:25 AM | PERMALINKI would like to believe that Pete Sessions' declarations of "love" to the handsome, mustachioed Stanford are nothing more than a gay infatuation. But I know better. Posted by: Bellwetherman on December 28, 2009 at 10:44 AM | PERMALINKI can see 'Ol Pete now. Is this what they call a "bromance?" Do Sessions and Stanford read the Bible, hug and cry together? So touching . . . Posted by: pj in jesusland on December 28, 2009 at 11:16 AM | PERMALINKWow. This Republican't love story plays right into the ads being run on Chicago radio stations as of today. A GOP aspirant for the Senate (Andy Martin) is running commercials claiming that Mark Kirk (R-IL) is "a homosexual". I've never heard such a blatant attack on any politician based on their personal history, Dem or Rep. This is what the radical right is doing in American politics today. Posted by: Gridlock on December 28, 2009 at 11:35 AM | PERMALINKdamn, I was hoping it was Jeff Sessions Posted by: martin on December 28, 2009 at 11:54 AM | PERMALINKWhen I first read the report I thought it was a typo. Most straight guys who are not a relative do NOT send another guy anything that says "I love you" in it unless someone died or something. It's just not something you usually see. If he's gay, then fine -- nothing wrong with that all. But otherwise that's just strange. Very, very strange. Posted by: Mark D on December 28, 2009 at 12:00 PM | PERMALINKI love you, man. It might be a Southern thing. Southerners have some weird Britishisms, like for example the liberal use of the word "love" among adults of the same sex. Posted by: Myles SG on December 28, 2009 at 12:25 PM | PERMALINKSession's comment seems to translate to "Is that a thick roll of high-denomination bills in your pocket, or are you just happy to see me?" Posted by: N.Wells on December 28, 2009 at 2:23 PM | PERMALINK"I love you and believe in you,'' said the e-mail sent on Feb. 17. "If you want my ear/voice/mouth/anus/penis -- e-mail,'' it said, signed "Pete.'' That's some come out letter. But, in light the risk, it makes me wonder what else they were into besides long moon-lit walks on Caribbean beaches. Question: Does Stanford have any affiliation with the C-street project? Posted by: Winkandanod on December 28, 2009 at 5:31 PM | PERMALINK"STANFORD AND SESSIONS, SITTING IN A TREE...." B-R-I-B-I-N-G ? Posted by: Indiana Joe on December 28, 2009 at 6:16 PM | PERMALINK"I love you and believe in you, said the e-mail sent on Feb. 17. 'If you want my ear/voice/lips/ass/Mr. Happy -- e-mail,'' it said.' This is the sort of greedy creep that Repiglicans love and respect, why is everyone so puzzled? Posted by: delver on December 28, 2009 at 7:53 PM | PERMALINKA great mass of people , some good , some gooder , will never know the true depth of republican commitment . Posted by: FRP on December 29, 2009 at 7:53 AM | PERMALINKSo us British men like to call each other "love" - is this another "Americanism". I recall an american family saying they took food on holiday to London because the British eat squirrel. Boy you have some strange folks in the USA. No we British call each other lots of things - Mate, Geezer, Fellah, You and if its a Police Officer, Sir!! Posted by: Bob Jennings on December 30, 2009 at 8:20 AM | PERMALINKSometimes it's really that simple, isn't it? I feel a little stupid for not thinking of this myself/earlier, though. Posted by: 轮盘赌赚钱 on January 23, 2010 at 6:11 AM | PERMALINKI cannot believe this will work! Posted by: ruleta online on January 28, 2010 at 12:47 PM | PERMALINK
May 2011
April 2011 March 2011 February 2011 January 2011 December 2010 November 2010 October 2010 September 2010 August 2010 July 2010 June 2010 May 2010 April 2010 March 2010 February 2010 January 2010 December 2009 November 2009 October 2009 September 2009 August 2009 July 2009 June 2009 May 2009 April 2009 March 2009 February 2009 January 2009 December 2008 November 2008 October 2008 September 2008 August 2008 July 2008 June 2008 May 2008 April 2008 March 2008 February 2008 January 2008 December 2007 November 2007 October 2007 September 2007 August 2007 July 2007 June 2007 May 2007 April 2007 March 2007 February 2007 January 2007 December 2006 November 2006 October 2006 September 2006 August 2006 July 2006 June 2006 May 2006 April 2006 March 2006 February 2006 January 2006 December 2005 November 2005 October 2005 September 2005 August 2005 July 2005 June 2005 May 2005 April 2005 March 2005 February 2005 January 2005 December 2004 November 2004 October 2004 September 2004 August 2004 July 2004 June 2004 May 2004 April 2004 March 2004 February 2004 January 2004 December 2003 November 2003 October 2003 September 2003 August 2003 July 2003 June 2003 May 2003 April 2003 March 2003 February 2003 January 2003 December 2002 |
|
|
    |
|
||||||
|
|
|||||||
|
||||||||
buy from Amazon and
support the Monthly
|
||||||||
