the DSCC

Boxer Expands Lead, Hodes Closing

Public Policy Polling’s latest survey of New Hampshire shows Kelly Ayotte’s numbers flagging in the wake of the FRM scandal.

The poll gives Ayotte 45% of the vote, to 42% for Democratic candidate Paul Hodes. This is within the margin of error and the smallest advantage seen for Ayotte all year, in any poll. The gap between the two candidates has shrunk by four points since PPP’s last survey in April.

Meanwhile in California, incumbent Democratic Sen. Barbara Boxer posted a nine point lead over failed Republican CEO Carly Fiorina, 49% to 40%. This represents a six-point expansion of her lead from PPP’s last California poll from May.

The more voters get to know Kelly Ayotte and Carly Fiorina, the less they like about them.

Public Policy Polling: Boxer expands lead

Independent voters have turned against Carly Fiorina over the last two months and the result is Barbara Boxer expanding her lead to 49-40 in the California Senate race after holding just a 45-42 advantage in a PPP poll two months ago.

Fiorina wasn't particularly well liked before the primary when 22% of voters said they had a favorable opinion of her and 30% said they viewed her unfavorably. Now they like her even less. Just 28% of Californians have a positive opinion of her, while 40% see her negatively. That shift has been particularly sharp with independent voters. Her favorability with them has risen from 15% to 20% over the last couple months, but her unfavorability has gone up much more rapidly from 23% to 40%.

As independents have grown to hold a more unfavorable opinion of Fiorina their loyalties in the race have shifted toward Boxer. The incumbent has a 48-38 lead with them now, flipping the 10 point deficit she faced to Fiorina at 42-32 back in May. Beyond that both candidates have pretty solid holds on their party's support- Boxer is up 77-13 with Democrats and Fiorina is up 77-13 with Republicans. To win in a heavily Democratic state like California Fiorina would need to get more crossover support from Democrats than Boxer did from Republicans and also win with independents. Right now neither of those things are happening.

Boxer's probably not completely out of the woods- her numbers still leave something to be desired with more voters disapproving (46%) of her than approve (44%). Even though they're planning to vote for her independents still don't actually like her, with 48% disapproving and only 40% approving. But it appears as though the more independents get to know Fiorina the more of them consider Boxer to be the lesser of two evils.

The trend in Boxer's reelection bids has been for her to look vulnerable early in the cycle and then get safer and safer as the election nears and her Republican opponent turns out not to make that strong of a candidate. We could be seeing that play itself out again this year.

Seattle Post-Intelligencer: Rossi: Repeal Wall St. reform legislation

Republican Senate candidate Dino Rossi said Tuesday he wants to repeal recently-passed legislation that sought to provide greater oversight of Wall Street in the wake of the economic collapse.

Rossi, who is running against Democratic Sen. Patty Murray, has previously said he wants to repeal the health care reform legislation Democrats previously passed.

The new financial law would create a Consumer Financial Protection Bureau inside the Federal Reserve that could write new rules to protect consumers from unfair credit card and mortgage practices.

It also creates a new council of regulators that would set standards for how much cash banks must keep on hand to prevent them from triggering a financial crisis. And it would put limits on Wall Street banks' ability to speculate for their own accounts and their ability to own hedge funds.

Rossi was talking to on ABC/Washington Post's "Top Line."

Here's more:

Speaking of the health care measure...

"The cost -- the $500 billion tax increase alone cost the Boeing Co. in my state $150 million. But if you replicate that across the state of Washington, there's tens of thousands of jobs that'll be lost or won't be created because of Patty Murray's 60th and deciding vote. We shouldn't be trying to kill jobs in our state right now."

Asked if he would also would press to repeal the Wall Street reform bill, Rossi said:

"I think we should. I think we should put reforms in that actually protect the public and don't reduce the amount of money that small businesses have available to them to grow, because 64 percent of job creation since '92 came from small businesses, and now, we're just killing them."

Julie Edwards, Murray's campaign spokeswoman, said Rossi's views on the Wall Street bill are "an extreme position that's out of step with Washington state."

Sacramento Bee: Host of Fiorina event in Sacramento endorses Boxer

Republican U.S. Senate candidate Carly Fiorina might have picked the wrong restaurant to announce her Latino outreach effort.

Fiorina said at a campaign stop at Texas Mexican Restaurant in Sacramento last month that she was pleased to be supported by people like Griselda Barajas, a member of the Sacramento Metro Chamber's board and owner of Griselda's Catering, which hosted the event.

Barajas, a Democrat, was undecided at the time.

Not anymore. Barajas is endorsing incumbent Democratic Sen. Barbara Boxer, Boxer's campaign said Monday.

RON JOHNSON ADMITS HIS CAMPAIGN WILL BE BOUGHT AND PAID FOR BY BRITISH PETROLUEM

After Promising To Move His BP Investments Into A Blind Trust, Johnson Now Admits He Wants to Sell BP Stock To “Finance This Campaign”

Big Oil Apologist Ron Johnson Owns Between $116,000 and $315,000 In BP Stock

Two weeks after telling reporters he would divest from BP or move his British Petroleum investments into a blind trust, extremist Ron Johnson did an about face on Monday – telling the Associated Press that he plans to “eventually” sell off his stock in BP, based on “market conditions,” in order to “finance this campaign.” Earlier in the month, multiple media outlets reported that Johnson owns between $116,000 and $315,000 in British Petroleum stock. Johnson has a history of sticking up for BP, blasting the Obama Administration’s plans to protect taxpayers by forcing British Petroleum to set up a $20 billion escrow fund to pay for damages and cleanup resulting from the Gulf oil spill, and telling radio host Ed Morrissey that now “is not the time to be beating up on those guys [BP], quite honestly.”

“Big Oil apologist Ron Johnson didn’t mince any words when he said his campaign will be bought and paid for by British Petroleum,” said DSCC National Press Secretary Deirdre Murphy. “Ron Johnson has made it clear he’ll only keep his promises if the price is right to fund his campaign. If Wisconsin voters needed any more evidence that Johnson is a shill for the special interests, they surely got it today.”

Since he won the backing of the Republican Party of Wisconsin for his Senate run, Ron Johnson has come under fire for his out-of-the-mainstream views. Johnson is in favor of completely repealing health care reform, which would reopen the Medicare donut hole, bring back denial of coverage based on preexisting conditions, and throw thousands of Wisconsinites off of health insurance. Johnson believes that Social Security is a “Ponzi scheme,” and under his proposal to privatize Social Security, Wisconsin senior citizens would be left to fend for themselves in their golden years. Thousands of seniors would be sent into poverty, with their livelihoods left to the volatility of the stock market. In fact, over 1 million Wisconsin residents receive Social Security benefits. Many Wisconsin residents simply would not be able to get by if not for Social Security, which has lifted millions of seniors out of poverty since it was created in 1935.

Johnson: I Defend Big Oil. In June 2010, Johnson described himself as unapologetically pro-Big Oil. He said, “I mean, in some of my earlier speeches, it will probably be used against me, I mean, I defend big oil and big pharma because, bottom line is, I like the fact that I can get gas on virtually every corner of America, you know, I got a car. You know, I’ve got a factory. We have to use electricity, you know, we are an oil-based economy… know, I mean…..am I alone? I mean, silly me.” [Republican Women of Outagamie County, 6/17/10]

Johnson: $20 Billion Escrow Fund For BP Violates The Rule of Law. In June 2010, Johnson blasted the federal government for pushing BP to set aside a $20 billion escrow fund to pay for the damages of the oil spill. He said, “It is very troubling when we circumvent the rule of law.” [AP, 6/21/10]

Johnson: I’m “Disappointed” The Obama Administration Is Launching An “Assault” On BP. In June 2010, Johnson urged the Obama administration to go easy on BP. He said, “And, I mean, I am, I am disappointed that the uh, you know, the Obama Administration is just, you know, kinda doing an all out assault now on, on uh, the oil company before we have the problem fixed. ” [“Here and Now,” Wisconsin Public Television, 6/11/10]

AP: Wis. Senate candidate wavers on sale of BP stock
SCOTT BAUER
July 26, 2010
http://www.forbes.com/feeds/ap/2010/07/26/politics-energy-us-senate-race-bp_7798291.html?boxes=marketschannelwires

MADISON, Wis. -- Republican Senate candidate Ron Johnson said Monday he hasn't decided whether to sell his BP stock, two weeks after he told reporters he would get rid of it.
Financial disclosure forms show the Oshkosh manufacturer owns between $116,000 and $315,000 in BP stock. On July 9, his campaign said he would move his investments into a blind trust.
Then after a campaign rally days later, Johnson told reporters he planned to sell the BP PLC stock to help finance his campaign against Democratic Sen. Russ Feingold. Monday, he said the sale wasn't certain.
"I think that will eventually happen, but I'm going to do it based on market conditions," Johnson said after a lunch hosted by the political website wispolitics.com. "I'm going to have to finance this campaign. ... At some point in time, to get my message out, that will probably happen. But it's going to be based on market conditions."
When asked if he would not sell the stock if the price was low, Johnson said, "We'll just watch. I haven't made a decision on that yet."
Feingold's campaign accused Johnson of talking out of both sides of his mouth.
"The fact that he now says he is waiting to make a profit off of his investment in BP so that he can continue to fund his campaign to defend big oil, shows that he is more interested in corporate profits than doing the right thing," said Feingold's campaign strategist John Kraus.
BP shares rose almost 5 percent to $36.68 in midday trading Monday in New York as the stock market anticipated a formal announcement that the company would replace Tony Hayward as chief executive.
BP's stock price hit a 14-year low in late June as the costs to contain the oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico continued to rise.
Johnson, who owns Oshkosh-based plastics maker Pacur LLC, is mounting his first campaign for office. He got into the Senate race May 17 after appearing at a couple of tea party rallies. He immediately put $1.5 million of his own money into the race, leaving him with just shy of $1 million cash on hand through the end of June.
Feingold, whose only reported large asset was a mutual fund worth between $50,000 and $100,000, has $4.3 million in campaign cash on hand in his bid for a fourth term. Feingold raised $1.4 million in the three-month period ending in June.
Johnson's financial disclosure forms showed that along with the BP stock, he owned between $50,000 and $101,000 in Exxon Mobil Corp and $15,000 to $50,000 in Occidental Petroleum Corp.
The exact amounts aren't clear because the disclosure report only requires the checking of boxes that list values in broad ranges.
Feingold and Johnson have been sparring for weeks over oil.
Two weeks ago, Feingold ran an ad accusing Johnson of being a friend of Big Oil and being open to drilling in the Great Lakes. Johnson strongly denied he would support Great Lakes drilling and quickly responded with an ad of his own, accusing Feingold of being "stuck in the mud" and saying he knew Johnson opposed Great Lakes drilling.
Johnson has previously criticized President Barack Obama's administration for having BP set aside a $20 billion fund for Gulf residents and businesses hurt by the oil spill. While saying BP should be held accountable, Johnson said the government "circumvent(ed) the rule of law" by not waiting for a formal finding of negligence.
Johnson is being challenged for the Republican nomination by Watertown businessman Dave Westlake and Milwaukee plumber Stephen M. Finn. The winner in the Sept. 14 primary will face Feingold and independent candidate Rob Taylor, a Cumberland software engineer, on Nov. 2.

RICHARD BURR VOTES TO ALLOW SPECIAL INTERESTS AND CORPORATIONS TO BUY U.S. ELECTIONS

By Opposing The DISCLOSE Act, Burr Sides With Special Interests And Against North Carolinians

Senator Richard Burr today continued his bad habit of standing up for the special interests by voting against the DISCLOSE Act, a landmark piece of legislation that requires corporations and organizations to disclose their role in political ads. The DISCLOSE Act will restore transparency to political campaigns following the Supreme Court’s Citizens United decision, which rolled back important campaign finance rules and effectively allows corporations, special interests, and even foreign nations to spend unlimited amounts of money to influence elections. Due to Republican obstruction, the Senate won’t even be able to debate the legislation on the Senate floor this week.

“Time after time Senator Burr chooses to stand up for the special interests and against North Carolina families,” DSCC National Press Secretary Deirdre Murphy said. “Voters have every right to know who is paying for the attack ads blanketing their television screens night after night. Senator Burr might make the special interests happy with his voting record, but he sure isn’t building any goodwill with North Carolina families.”

Senator Burr has consistently opposed measures designed to help Main Street North Carolina. Senator Burr voted against pro-consumer financial regulatory reform two weeks ago and has repeatedly opposed giving unemployed North Carolinians the help they need as they continue looking for jobs in this still recovering economy.

CHUCK GRASSLEY VOTES TO ALLOW SPECIAL INTERESTS AND CORPORATIONS TO BUY U.S. ELECTIONS

By Opposing The DISCLOSE Act, Grassley Sides With Special Interests And Against Iowans

Senator Chuck Grassley today continued his bad habit of standing up for the special interests by voting against the DISCLOSE Act, a landmark piece of legislation that requires corporations and organizations to disclose their role in political ads. The DISCLOSE Act will restore transparency to political campaigns following the Supreme Court’s Citizens United decision, which rolled back important campaign finance rules and effectively allows corporations, special interests, and even foreign nations to spend unlimited amounts of money to influence elections. Due to Republican obstruction, the Senate won’t even be able to debate the legislation on the Senate floor this week.

“Time after time Senator Grassley chooses to stand up for the special interests and against Iowa families,” DSCC National Press Secretary Deirdre Murphy said. “Voters have every right to know who is paying for the attack ads blanketing their television screens night after night. Senator Grassley might make the special interests happy with his voting record, but he sure isn’t building any goodwill with Iowa families.”

Senator Grassley has consistently opposed measures designed to help Main Street Iowa. Senator Grassley voted against pro-consumer financial regulatory reform two weeks ago and has repeatedly opposed giving unemployed Iowans the help they need as they continue looking for jobs in this still recovering economy.

DAVID VITTER VOTES TO ALLOW SPECIAL INTERESTS AND CORPORATIONS TO BUY U.S. ELECTIONS

By Opposing The DISCLOSE Act, Vitter Sides With Special Interests And Against Louisianans

Senator David Vitter today continued his bad habit of standing up for the special interests by voting against the DISCLOSE Act, a landmark piece of legislation that requires corporations and organizations to disclose their role in political ads. The DISCLOSE Act will restore transparency to political campaigns following the Supreme Court’s Citizens United decision, which rolled back important campaign finance rules and effectively allows corporations, special interests, and even foreign nations to spend unlimited amounts of money to influence elections. Due to Republican obstruction, the Senate won’t even be able to debate the legislation on the Senate floor this week.

“Time after time Senator Vitter chooses to stand up for the special interests and against Louisiana families,” DSCC National Press Secretary Deirdre Murphy said. “Voters have every right to know who is paying for the attack ads blanketing their television screens night after night. Senator Vitter might make the special interests happy with his voting record, but he sure isn’t building any goodwill with Louisiana families.”

Senator Vitter has consistently opposed measures designed to help Main Street Louisiana. Senator Vitter voted against pro-consumer financial regulatory reform two weeks ago and has repeatedly opposed giving unemployed Louisianans the help they need as they continue looking for jobs in this still recovering economy.

WASHINGTON LOBBYIST DAN COATS SUPPORTS ALLOWING SPECIAL INTERESTS AND CORPORATIONS TO BUY U.S. ELECTIONS

By Opposing The DISCLOSE Act, Coats Sides With Special Interests And Against Hoosiers

Washington lobbyist Dan Coats continues his bad habit of standing up for the special interests by opposing the DISCLOSE Act, a landmark piece of legislation that requires corporations and organizations to disclose their role in political ads. The DISCLOSE Act will restore transparency to political campaigns following the Supreme Court’s Citizens United decision, which rolled back important campaign finance rules and effectively allows corporations, special interests, and even foreign nations to spend unlimited amounts of money to influence elections. Due to Republican obstruction, the Senate won’t even be able to debate the legislation on the Senate floor this week.

“Time after time Washington lobbyist Dan Coats chooses to stand up for the special interests and against Indiana families,” DSCC National Press Secretary Deirdre Murphy said. “Voters have every right to know who is paying for the attack ads blanketing their television screens night after night. Coats might make his special interest backers happy with his positions, but he sure isn’t building any goodwill with Indiana families.”

Dan Coats has consistently opposed measures designed to help Main Street Indiana. Coats opposed recent pro-consumer financial regulatory reform legislation and continues to oppose giving unemployed Hoosiers the help they need as they continue looking for jobs in this still recovering economy.

PAT TOOMEY SUPPORTS ALLOWING SPECIAL INTERESTS AND CORPORATIONS TO BUY U.S. ELECTIONS

By Opposing The DISCLOSE Act, Toomey Sides With Special Interests And Against Pennsylvanians

Former Wall Street trader Pat Toomey continues his bad habit of standing up for the special interests by opposing the DISCLOSE Act, a landmark piece of legislation that requires corporations and organizations to disclose their role in political ads. The DISCLOSE Act will restore transparency to political campaigns following the Supreme Court’s Citizens United decision, which rolled back important campaign finance rules and effectively allows corporations, special interests, and even foreign nations to spend unlimited amounts of money to influence elections. Due to Republican obstruction, the Senate won’t even be able to debate the legislation on the Senate floor this week.

“Time after time Pat Toomey chooses to stand up for the special interests and against Pennsylvania families,” DSCC National Press Secretary Deirdre Murphy said. “Voters have every right to know who is paying for the attack ads blanketing their television screens night after night. Toomey might make his special interest backers happy with his positions, but he sure isn’t building any goodwill with Pennsylvania families.”

Pat Toomey has consistently opposed measures designed to help Main Street Pennsylvania. Toomey opposed recent pro-consumer financial regulatory reform legislation and continues to oppose giving unemployed Pennsylvanians the help they need as they continue looking for jobs in this still recovering economy.
Toomey’s Club For Growth Issued Warning In Opposition To DISCLOSE Act. The Club For Growth, which Toomey led for years and stepped down from to concentrate on his Senate run urged Congress to reject the DISCLOSE Act. A web posting said: “This legislation proposes a regulatory thicket” on groups seeking to buy ads and all Congress members should vote no. [Club For Growth blog, 5/25/2010]

SHARRON ANGLE SUPPORTS ALLOWING SPECIAL INTERESTS AND CORPORATIONS TO BUY U.S. ELECTIONS

By Opposing The DISCLOSE Act, Angle Sides With Special Interests And Against Nevadans

Extremist Sharron Angle continues her bad habit of standing up for the special interests by opposing the DISCLOSE Act, a landmark piece of legislation that requires corporations and organizations to disclose their role in political ads. The DISCLOSE Act will restore transparency to political campaigns following the Supreme Court’s Citizens United decision, which rolled back important campaign finance rules and effectively allows corporations, special interests, and even foreign nations to spend unlimited amounts of money to influence elections. Due to Republican obstruction, the Senate won’t even be able to debate the legislation on the Senate floor this week.

“Time after time Sharron Angle chooses to stand up for the special interests and against Nevada families,” DSCC National Press Secretary Deirdre Murphy said. “Voters have every right to know who is paying for the attack ads blanketing their television screens night after night. Angle might make her special interest supporters happy with her positions, but she sure isn’t building any goodwill with Nevada families.”

Sharron Angle has consistently opposed measures designed to help Main Street Nevada. Angle opposed recent pro-consumer financial regulatory reform legislation and continues to oppose giving unemployed Nevadans the help they need as they continue looking for jobs in this still recovering economy.
Angle Believes Candidates Should Be Left To Limit Themselves. According to Sharron Angle’s old website, “Sharron Angle believes that campaign finance limitations must come from the candidates themselves.” (Previously posted at www.sharronangle.com; now available at www.therealsharronangle.com)

DINO ROSSI BECOMES FIRST SENATE CANDIDATE IN COUNTRY TO PLEDGE REPEAL OF WALL STREET REFORMS

In Interview With ABC News, Dino Rossi Says If Elected He’d Return To Wall Street’s Old Ways of Doing Business Of Excessive Risk And Greed

Rossi Shows Loyalty To Big Banks Over Washington Families

Perennial politician Dino Rossi told ABC News this afternoon that if elected he would repeal Wall Street reform. Rossi opposed the financial regulatory reform bill, which passed two weeks ago and was signed into law by President Obama last week, and today called on the bill to be repealed. Among other pro-consumer provisions, the Wall Street reform bill will force lenders to provide clear and accurate information to average Washingtonian looking to buy a home and get a mortgage. No longer will lenders be able to con honest Washingtonians into signing loans with exorbitant interest rates or variable interest rates that the consumer knows nothing about. This provision might not mean much to ethically challenged politician Dino Rossi, who has a long history of personally profiting off of shady real estate deals and seminars teaching investors how to get rich off of foreclosures, but it means a lot to Washington families who are struggling due to the housing and economic downturn.

“Dino Rossi is out of step with Washington values and not on the side of consumers in his state,” said DSCC National Press Secretary Deirdre Murphy. “Rossi shows more loyalty to big banks than to Washington taxpayers.”

The financial regulatory reform bill, which perennial politician Dino Rossi wants to repeal, will hold banks accountable and protect consumers. The bill will end taxpayer bailouts by forcing banks to clean up their own messes from now on. The bill will also stop banks from taking secret, excessive risk with consumers’ money and force big banks and credit card companies to offer clear, fair terms to consumers. This legislation will put an end to the reckless and irresponsible behavior that led to the economic collapse in the first place, while ensuring that the financial system works for all Americans. A recent Washington Post-ABC News poll shows voters back financial reform by a 65% to 31% margin.

Impeccable Timing

Well, this is unfortunate: Florida Republican Jeb Bush held a fundraiser for tea-powered Kentucky Senate candidate Rand Paul today, which just happens to be the 20^th anniversary of the Americans with Disabilities Act.

The ADA, a landmark piece of legislation which was signed into law by Jeb Bush’s father (the first President Bush), made it illegal for employers to discriminate against the disabled. Yet Rand Paul has his reservations:

Tucked away in that same interview was a similar question about ADA. Did the legislation go too far, asked NPR's Robert Siegel.

"I think a lot of things could be handled locally," Paul said. "For example, I think that we should try to do everything we can to allow for people with disabilities and handicaps... I think if you have a two-story office and you hire someone who's handicapped, it might be reasonable to let him have an office on the first floor rather than the government saying you have to have a $100,000 elevator. And I think when you get to solutions like that, the more local the better, and the more common sense the decisions are, rather than having a federal government make those decisions."

The campaign of Paul’s Democratic opponent, Kentucky attorney general Jack Conway, would like to know: does Jeb Bush stand with Rand on the ADA? Does he, like Rand, truly believe that the federal government shouldn’t be “making decisions” about protecting disabled Americans from discrimination in the workplace?

Or will it be Rand Paul who flips once again and backtracks on his position, as he has done on the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and on holding BP accountable for the disastrous oil spill?

TONY HAYWARD MIGHT WANT HIS LIFE BACK, BUT RON JOHNSON WANTS HIS STOCK BACK

After Telling Reporters Two Weeks Ago He Would Sell BP Stock, Johnson Now Wavers

Big Oil Apologist Ron Johnson Owns Between $116,000 and $315,000 In BP Stock

Two short weeks after telling reporters that he would sell off his stock in BP, extremist Ron Johnson is now backing down from his campaign pledge and is undecided on whether to get rid of his stock in the Big Oil company, according to a new report from the AP. Earlier in the month, multiple media outlets reported that the candidate owns between $116,000 and $315,000 in British Petroleum stock. Several days after these reports came out, Johnson promised that he would get rid of his BP stock by selling it off and using the money to finance his campaign. Johnson has a history of sticking up for BP, blasting the Obama Administration’s plans to protect taxpayers by forcing British Petroleum to set up a $20 billion escrow fund to pay for damages and cleanup resulting from the Gulf Oil Spill, and telling radio host Ed Morrissey that now “is not the time to be beating up on those guys [BP], quite honestly.”

“BP CEO Tony Hayward might want his life back, but Big Oil apologist Ron Johnson just wants his BP stock back,” said DSCC National Press Secretary Deirdre Murphy. “It only took two weeks for Ron Johnson to backtrack on his pledge to sell off his BP stock, but it will take a lot longer than that for Wisconsin voters to forget this blatant display of hypocrisy. Ron Johnson today showed he cares about only one thing: his Wall Street portfolio. The question remains: Is Ron Johnson breaking his word so that he can fund his campaign with BP profits?”

Since he won the backing of the Republican Party of Wisconsin for his Senate run, Ron Johnson has come under fire for his out-of-the-mainstream views. Johnson is in favor of completely repealing health care reform, which would reopen the Medicare donut hole, bring back denial of coverage based on preexisting conditions, and throw thousands of Wisconsinites off of health insurance. Johnson believes that Social Security is a “Ponzi scheme,” and under his proposal to privatize Social Security, Wisconsin senior citizens would be left to fend for themselves in their golden years. Thousands of seniors would be sent into poverty, with their livelihoods left to the volatility of the stock market. In fact, over 1 million Wisconsin residents receive Social Security benefits. Many Wisconsin residents simply would not be able to get by if not for Social Security, which has lifted millions of seniors out of poverty since it was created in 1935.

Johnson: I Defend Big Oil. In June 2010, Johnson described himself as unapologetically pro-Big Oil. He said, “I mean, in some of my earlier speeches, it will probably be used against me, I mean, I defend big oil and big pharma because, bottom line is, I like the fact that I can get gas on virtually every corner of America, you know, I got a car. You know, I’ve got a factory. We have to use electricity, you know, we are an oil-based economy… know, I mean…..am I alone? I mean, silly me.” [Republican Women of Outagamie County, 6/17/10]

Johnson: $20 Billion Escrow Fund For BP Violates The Rule of Law. In June 2010, Johnson blasted the federal government for pushing BP to set aside a $20 billion escrow fund to pay for the damages of the oil spill. He said, “It is very troubling when we circumvent the rule of law.” [AP, 6/21/10]

Johnson: I’m “Disappointed” The Obama Administration Is Launching An “Assault” On BP. In June 2010, Johnson urged the Obama administration to go easy on BP. He said, “And, I mean, I am, I am disappointed that the uh, you know, the Obama Administration is just, you know, kinda doing an all out assault now on, on uh, the oil company before we have the problem fixed. ” [“Here and Now,” Wisconsin Public Television, 6/11/10]

AP: Wis. Senate candidate wavers on sale of BP stock
SCOTT BAUER
July 26, 2010
http://www.forbes.com/feeds/ap/2010/07/26/politics-energy-us-senate-race-bp_7798291.html?boxes=marketschannelwires

MADISON, Wis. -- Republican Senate candidate Ron Johnson said Monday he hasn't decided whether to sell his BP stock, two weeks after he told reporters he would get rid of it.
Financial disclosure forms show the Oshkosh manufacturer owns between $116,000 and $315,000 in BP stock. On July 9, his campaign said he would move his investments into a blind trust.
Then after a campaign rally days later, Johnson told reporters he planned to sell the BP PLC stock to help finance his campaign against Democratic Sen. Russ Feingold. Monday, he said the sale wasn't certain.
"I think that will eventually happen, but I'm going to do it based on market conditions," Johnson said after a lunch hosted by the political website wispolitics.com. "I'm going to have to finance this campaign. ... At some point in time, to get my message out, that will probably happen. But it's going to be based on market conditions."
When asked if he would not sell the stock if the price was low, Johnson said, "We'll just watch. I haven't made a decision on that yet."
Feingold's campaign accused Johnson of talking out of both sides of his mouth.
"The fact that he now says he is waiting to make a profit off of his investment in BP so that he can continue to fund his campaign to defend big oil, shows that he is more interested in corporate profits than doing the right thing," said Feingold's campaign strategist John Kraus.
BP shares rose almost 5 percent to $36.68 in midday trading Monday in New York as the stock market anticipated a formal announcement that the company would replace Tony Hayward as chief executive.
BP's stock price hit a 14-year low in late June as the costs to contain the oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico continued to rise.
Johnson, who owns Oshkosh-based plastics maker Pacur LLC, is mounting his first campaign for office. He got into the Senate race May 17 after appearing at a couple of tea party rallies. He immediately put $1.5 million of his own money into the race, leaving him with just shy of $1 million cash on hand through the end of June.
Feingold, whose only reported large asset was a mutual fund worth between $50,000 and $100,000, has $4.3 million in campaign cash on hand in his bid for a fourth term. Feingold raised $1.4 million in the three-month period ending in June.
Johnson's financial disclosure forms showed that along with the BP stock, he owned between $50,000 and $101,000 in Exxon Mobil Corp and $15,000 to $50,000 in Occidental Petroleum Corp.
The exact amounts aren't clear because the disclosure report only requires the checking of boxes that list values in broad ranges.
Feingold and Johnson have been sparring for weeks over oil.
Two weeks ago, Feingold ran an ad accusing Johnson of being a friend of Big Oil and being open to drilling in the Great Lakes. Johnson strongly denied he would support Great Lakes drilling and quickly responded with an ad of his own, accusing Feingold of being "stuck in the mud" and saying he knew Johnson opposed Great Lakes drilling.
Johnson has previously criticized President Barack Obama's administration for having BP set aside a $20 billion fund for Gulf residents and businesses hurt by the oil spill. While saying BP should be held accountable, Johnson said the government "circumvent(ed) the rule of law" by not waiting for a formal finding of negligence.
Johnson is being challenged for the Republican nomination by Watertown businessman Dave Westlake and Milwaukee plumber Stephen M. Finn. The winner in the Sept. 14 primary will face Feingold and independent candidate Rob Taylor, a Cumberland software engineer, on Nov. 2.

TWO-FACED KEN BUCK: SAYS ONE THING ON STAGE, ANOTHER OFF STAGE

Ken Buck Slowly Exposing Himself As A Fraud As He Backtracks, Flip-Flops, And Continues To Confuse Voters

Latest Controversy: Calling Tea Partiers “Dumbasses” In Private After Praising Them Publicly

As the Republican Senate primary in Colorado draws closer, extremist candidate Ken Buck continues to expose himself as a fraud as he backtracks, flip-flops, and confuses voters across the state. As the Denver Post and KUSA reported late last night, Buck was recently caught privately calling tea party members who questioned President Obama’s citizenship “dumbasses,” after publicly praising tea partiers and even publicly supporting “birther” legislation in the past. Buck is now scrambling to apologize to tea partiers, many of whom thought they had a friend in Buck, in fear of losing their support to establishment Republican Jane Norton before the August 10th primary.

“Coloradans always knew that Ken Buck was an extremist, but now they are finding out he is a fraud as well,” said DSCC National Press Secretary Deirdre Murphy. “After receiving strong backing from the tea party, Ken Buck has the nerve to trash them in private. Already under fire for a spate of recent off the cuff comments, Ken Buck’s latest comments show he might not be the candidate many conservatives thought he was.”

Ken Buck continues to show himself as a fraud by repeatedly shifting positions and saying one thing one day, and another the next. After criticizing Tom Tancredo for saying that President Obama represented “the greatest threat to our liberty,” Buck switched positions just several days later and said “there is a lot of truth in what Tom Tancredo says.” At a recent campaign event, Buck told a woman she should vote for him because “I do not wear high heels.” This immediately sparked a controversy and Buck was again forced to backtrack and apologize for his statements.

In addition to his frequent backtracking, Ken Buck continue to show day in and day out that he is far outside the Colorado mainstream. Despite trashing the tea party in private, Buck has embraced the radical tea party agenda in nearly every way, supporting "birther" legislation, calling for federal student loan programs to be phased out and suggesting the unconstitutionality of Social Security.

AP: GOP's Kirk on defensive after latest discrepancy

Since Republican Senate candidate Mark Kirk acknowledged embellishing his military record, the slightest discrepancy in his life story prompts another round of news coverage questioning his honesty as he makes a bid for President Barack Obama's old Senate seat.

The focus this time is a defining story of Kirk's youth that he tells frequently, about nearly drowning when his sailboat capsized in Lake Michigan when he was 16 years old.

The Chicago Tribune reported Friday that Kirk recently told a boating magazine he watched the sunset from atop his overturned boat 34 years ago, while local news coverage of the rescue said he was pulled from Lake Michigan in the afternoon. Kirk told the Tribune he feared the sun would set and he'd be stuck on the water in the dark.

He was quick Friday to blast the Tribune, which also questioned claims about his ability to swim in 42-degree water and whether his body temperature was gravely low when he was rescued.

"It's unfortunate that some reporters had a pre-conceived premise that led to a ridiculous story about an event that is indisputable. Voters will see this story for what it is and I will continue to focus on the issues that matter and how I will serve the people of Illinois," Kirk said in a statement posted on his campaign website.

His Democratic opponent, Illinois treasurer Alexi Giannoulias, was quick to use the latest incident to take a pot shot at Kirk, with his campaign calling it Kirk's "original fish story."

"Congressman Kirk apparently can't tell the truth about anything," Giannoulias spokesman Matt McGrath said in a statement.

A Naval Reserve officer, Kirk has apologized since news reports surfaced in May that he had exaggerated his military record, including claiming a prestigious award he didn't get, and that he overstated his service, including serving in the first Gulf War when he didn't. Kirk has said he was "careless" in describing his military service and background.

He also has acknowledged twice being scolded by the Pentagon for improperly mingling politics with his military duties, something his campaign had flatly denied. And, he has had to weather criticism that he made too much of his past teaching experience that included working as a teacher for a year in England and working in a nursery during his senior year at Cornell University.

Kirk has since largely clammed up about his military service, instead referring reporters to his official military reports to answer questions. But he was happy to recount for a recent issue of Soundings magazine the details of his dramatic boating escapade and rescue in June 1976.

"I decided that I would take one long tack out and one long tack in to make it easy," Kirk is quoted as saying in a story on their website. "But I capsized a couple of more times and in one of them I lost the centerboard, so I really couldn't control the boat. I lost the halyard and ended up watching the sunset standing on the upside-down boat with only a ski belt on."

A local news story of Kirk's rescue, which he has posted on his campaign website, said he was rescued at 2:52 p.m. Kirk told the Tribune he didn't watch the sunset but denied any embellishment.

"I mean I was worried that the sun would go down and I would be in the dark at night, which is why I didn't want to be there," he told the newspaper.

Medical experts the Tribune talked to also doubted Kirk would have been able to swim in 42-degree water in the lake if his body temperature was in the 80s as he said.

A statement from Kirk's mother on his website says her son's body temperature was in the 80s. The local newspaper account said Kirk was reported to be suffering from exposure.

AP: Paul's father-in-law received $10,000 in subsidies

FRANKFORT, Ky. -- U.S. Senate candidate Rand Paul's campaign acknowledged Friday that his in-laws had benefited from federal farm subsidies that he has been criticizing in stump speeches.

The revelation brought accusations of hypocrisy from his opponent's camp.

Paul, a tea party-backed Republican, has been critical of the U.S. Department of Agriculture's farm subsidy program even though his father-in-law received more than $10,000 in payments over 12 years.

Paul has repeatedly pointed to the subsidy program as an example of government waste, saying farmers shouldn't be paid not to grow crops. He also criticized payments going to the estates of dead farmers.

A database of subsidy payments maintained by the Environmental Working Group, a Washington-based organization that monitors the nation's agricultural programs, shows Paul's father-in-law, Hilton Ashby of Russellville, received annual allotments between 1996 and 2007. The amounts ranged from $382 to $996, totaling $10,276. The database also shows a payment of nearly $1,600 in 1995 to the estate of H.T. Ashby, Paul's late grand-father-in-law.

Campaign manager Jesse Benton acknowledged the payments on Friday, saying Paul's call to end the subsidy program also applies to relatives.

"This is the type of program we can't afford," Benton said. "It applies to friends and relatives as much as anyone else. He wants to stop that program for everybody."

Paul, a tea party-backed candidate who is running for the seat of retiring Sen. Jim Bunning, was soundly criticized Friday afternoon by Allison Haley, spokeswoman for Democratic Senate candidate Jack Conway, for the payments to Ashby.

"Rand Paul favors imposing his risky ideas on everyone but himself," Haley said.

Haley accused Paul of hypocrisy, saying he has "railed against programs that support our farmers while his family is benefiting directly from the very same programs."

Ashby didn't immediately return a telephone call Friday afternoon.

Paul told a group of Kentucky farmers meeting in Louisville on Thursday that the federal payments may need to be cut to reduce the national debt. Conway told the same audience that eliminating the subsidy program, which pumped more than $200 million into the state last year, would hurt farm families.

In an effort to court farmers, an important voting bloc in Kentucky, Paul attended a church picnic earlier this week in western Kentucky, glad-handing with some of the state's largest growers of corn, soybean and wheat. They encouraged him to change his position on subsidies.

"We're caught between a rock and a hard place," said Glenn Howell, a Fulton County farmer who tills some 2,700 acres. "We've got to have the subsidies, right or wrong."

Paul, the son of former Republican presidential candidate and Texas Congressman Ron Paul, said he sees Kentucky's farming regions as must-wins if he is to be successful in November. Paul said needs to break even with Conway in the state's two largest cities and carry every other region of the state to win the race.

Run, Sharron, Run

After more than a month of shunning the press, Sharron Angle has finally
come out of her shell to meet the media...and upon doing so, promptly
ran away.

Angle (who had been available only to media she viewed useful for
fundraising purposes) finally invited reporters to a campaign event, her
first major availability since her primary victory.

Alas, the presence of reporters proved to be a bit too much for her:

In the warehouse of a family-owned clean diesel manufacturer in Sparks,
Angle delivered a three-minute speech on her desire to permanently
repeal the estate tax. When invited by the final speaker to stay and
answer a few questions, she turned on her heel and rushed out a back
door with a small cadre of staff members."

Apparently the Angle campaign's MO is: "When the going gets tough, turn
tail and run away."

Chicago Tribune: Conflicting details in Kirk's 1976 lake rescue

Republican U.S. Senate candidate Mark Kirk for a decade has told the story of how he nearly drowned when he was 16 while sailboating on Lake Michigan and how his rescue by the Coast Guard inspired him to pursue a career in public service.

The story is sprinkled with attention-grabbing details, but there are inconsistencies in Kirk's statements that suggest parts of his real-life drama have been embellished, a Tribune review has found.

In the most recent instance, the 50-year-old North Shore congressman told a boating magazine that he stood on his overturned sailboat and watched the sun set, when in fact he was rescued in midafternoon on June 15, 1976.

Kirk also has said he swam up to a mile in 42-degree water and that he was rescued with his body temperature hovering two degrees from death. Those declarations are questionable, based on interviews with an eyewitness and medical experts.

Basic elements of Kirk's story are not in dispute. He did capsize his boat, was pulled from the water by the Coast Guard and was taken by ambulance to a hospital. He said any inconsistencies in news accounts or his own words are minor and do not diminish the significance of the traumatic, life-changing experience.

"This is one of the most important events in my life. I was not as well-focused before this event but very well-focused after, aware of your own mortality," Kirk told the Tribune in a recent interview while standing near the spot on Lake Michigan where he set sail in 1976. "But … 34 years ago as a 16-year-old, this is the way I remember it."

It is not the first time this year Kirk has had to reconcile his public statements about major moments in his life with records that contradict him or don't back up the details as he tells them. Questions about Kirk's descriptions of his military career have become a significant issue in his race with Democratic state Treasurer Alexi Giannoulias to fill the seat once held by President Barack Obama.

Kirk, a Navy Reserve officer, recently apologized for repeatedly overstating his military achievements, from claiming an award for his intelligence unit as his own to saying he came under enemy fire while flying intelligence missions over Iraq. Stung by criticism, Kirk now declines to talk about his Navy service and instead refers questioners to his military records.

The Tribune examined the boating story in light of Kirk's acknowledgment that he overstated his military career.

The inconsistencies in the rescue story may not have the same galvanizing impact of inflating a military resume, but they raise a new set of questions about whether Kirk has added details to his true-life stories that make a better storyline.

According to news accounts and interviews, Kirk and a friend took Kirk's family Sunfish sailboat, a small craft, out from a Kenilworth beach in the afternoon and quickly ran into trouble keeping the boat upright. After dropping off his friend on a nearby private beach, Kirk went out alone to try to return the sailboat but capsized repeatedly.

The Wilmette Life, in an account published two days after the accident, began its story this way: "A Kenilworth youth was rescued by the U.S. Coast Guard, Tuesday afternoon, after his sailboat capsized in Lake Michigan about one-half mile off Winnetka."

The paper, which cited a Coast Guard chief by name, said Kirk was wearing a ski belt flotation device around his waist and was found drifting about 500 yards from the boat. The story said Kirk was in the water for at least 30 minutes before the Coast Guard rescued him at 2:52 p.m. He suffered from exposure and was taken by ambulance to Evanston Hospital, where he was treated and released, the paper said.

Kirk does not dispute that account, which he has included on his congressional Web site, but in a recent interview he included details that conflict with that story.

Soundings, a boating magazine, carried one of the most detailed accounts of Kirk's story in its July issue. Reporter Chris Landry recorded his half-hour telephone interview. He said he asked Kirk to recount what had happened.

"I just wanted him to tell the story right from the beginning," Landry said. "It made for a good story."

In the story, Kirk twice refers to being on the water as darkness fell.

"I lost the halyard and ended up watching the sunset standing on the upside-down boat with only a ski belt on," Kirk said, according to the quote in the story and the recording Landry played for the Tribune.

Kirk also noted a teenager on shore saw him struggling with the sailboat and called for help. "It was unusual because Sunfishes come home at night and this one wasn't," Kirk told the magazine.

But witness Bruce Guthrie, who was 13 at the time when he alerted authorities, remembers the entire incident playing out in the afternoon.

Guthrie told the Tribune he was putting shingles on his family's lakeside gazebo when he noticed the sailboat repeatedly capsizing, about a quarter-mile to a half-mile from shore. "I could just tell he was in trouble," Guthrie said.

Pressed on the timing of the rescue, Kirk told the Tribune the magazine reporter must have made a mistake. Informed the interview was recorded, Kirk then said he did not watch the sunset but denied embellishing his story.

"I mean I was worried that the sun would go down and I would be in the dark at night, which is why I didn't want to be there," Kirk told the Tribune.

Kirk has also said he swam up to a mile in 42-degree water in an aborted effort to reach shore, which he has described as anywhere from a mile to two miles away.

"I dove in for about a two-mile swim … thinking that I had swum a mile once in a high school pool, so if my life depended on it, I could probably do this," Kirk told Soundings magazine. "I got only about halfway and went through a classic near-death experience — reviewed my life, began to see the light."

During a news conference in April about cuts to the Coast Guard, Kirk talked about why it was important to keep two rescue stations open on Lake Michigan, saying the Coast Guard got to him just in time.

"The Coast Guard reported that my body temperature was around 82 degrees," Kirk said at that news conference. "Around 80 degrees is when your heart stops. And so, it was a just-in-time rescue."

The Coast Guard said it could not locate records from Kirk's rescue. The Coast Guard chief quoted in the 1976 article told the Tribune he could not recall the incident.

Kirk has told the story of his rescue many times with the confidence of a man whose experience was burned into memory.

"I should be at the bottom of the lake," Kirk told the Tribune during his first run for Congress in 2000. "And to be given a second chance means it has to mean something. For me, that means making a difference through public service, and it all comes from the lake."

In his recent interview with the Tribune, though, he said he could not recall how he knows some of the most colorful details.

Asked about the distance from shore and how far he swam, Kirk said he could not be sure because he had lost his eyeglasses in the water.

Asked how he knows the exact water temperature and body temperature, Kirk said he could not remember where he got the numbers. His campaign later provided a statement from his mother saying she remembered his body temperature was in the 80s when she saw him under a warming blanket at the hospital.

But medical experts said it was extremely unlikely Kirk's body temperature dropped to 82 in the half-hour plus he was in the water, even if it was 42 degrees as Kirk has said. As the body cools below the normal 98.6 degrees Fahrenheit, shivering sets in and hypothermia begins at a much earlier stage — 95 degrees, experts say.

Had Kirk's temperature reached 82 degrees, he likely would have been unable to swim and would have lost consciousness, three experts told the Tribune.

"It seems unlikely he could exert himself," said Dr. David Beiser, a University of Chicago doctor who specializes in emergency medicine. "That temperature is the temperature at which you have a high likelihood of your heart stopping."

Dr. Alan Steinman, former director of health and safety for the U.S. Coast Guard and an expert in sea survival, said, "Swimming a mile in 42-degree water is not realistic."

"Not only would he likely lose consciousness from severe hypothermia before he reached a mile distance, but it's probable he would have been unable to use his arms and legs effectively to swim for an hour in 42-degree water," Steinman said. "Whether his core temperature cooled to 82 degrees is still questionable, and if he were that severely hypothermic — and likely unconscious — it is unlikely the hospital would have treated and released him."

Kirk told the Tribune he had capsized repeatedly and so was in the water for longer than just after the last time the boat flipped. He said he had stopped swimming and was in and out of consciousness as the Coast Guard rescued him.

"I think what is clear is I was so cold that I was close to death," Kirk said.

Hotline: Colorado Republican Front-Runners Implode

It's a bad month to be a front-running candidate for a CO GOP nomination. Candidates who lead in polls in both the Senate and governor's races have slipped up of late, raising serious questions about their ability to compete in Nov. -- or whether they can win the Aug. 10 primary.

Earlier this month, the Denver Post pointed out identical passages in an essay written by ex-Rep. Scott McInnis (R) and a paper penned by a CO Supreme Court justice years earlier. McInnis acknowledged the plagiarism and has taken responsibility.

In the intervening days, McInnis has returned thousands of dollars he was paid to write the essay, on the history of water rights in CO. Several staffers have left his campaign, and GOP leaders are openly contemplating ways to get McInnis out of the race.

But he's not the only GOPer who's faced a self-inflicted wound -- one that may prove fatal. A new video went viral late Wednesday that showed Weld Co. DA Ken Buck (R) taking a shot at his main rival, ex-LG Jane Norton (R), based on her gender.

"Why should you vote for me? Because I do not wear high heels. She has questioned my manhood, I think it's fair to respond. I have cowboy boots. They have real bull**** on them," Buck told a crowd at a party last week.

Norton pounced, releasing a new ad slamming Buck's comments. Strategists also pointed out that Buck's slip will be magnified because the CO GOP electorate has a higher proportion of women voters than other states. A Norton spokesperson compared his remarks to ex-Sen. George Allen's (R-VA) "macaca" moment.

"Ken is going to have to use all of his best lawyer-speak to explain this really stupid statement. He may say it's no big deal, but just ask Creigh Deeds or George Allen what a comment like this can do to a statewide race," Norton spokesperson Cinamon Watson said.

In both cases, the errors have jeopardized front runners' leads in the upcoming primary. McInnis held a wide lead over businessman Dan Maes (R) in polls conducted before the plagiarism scandal broke, and Buck was surprising establishment GOPers by leading Norton in public polls as well.

Dems are likely to reap the benefits of McInnis's plagiarism. GOP strategists don't believe Maes can compete against Denver Mayor John Hickenlooper (D), and even McInnis would be hard-pressed to mount a comeback now.

But the GOP might not be in a bad place if Buck's flub proves fatal to his insurgent candidacy. Buck is more conservative than Norton, and national GOPers favor Norton as their nominee. Still, even if Norton takes advantage of Buck's error, Dems will do their part to make voters remember a GOP primary that has already forced Norton to the right.

The winner of the Senate race will face off against the winner of the Dem primary, where ex-state House Speaker Andrew Romanoff (D) and Sen. Michael Bennet (D) are competing.

Las Vegas Sun: Sharron Angle addresses media for 3 minutes on taxes then bolts

SPARKS — After more than a month dodging the press, Republican Senate nominee Sharron Angle on Wednesday invited reporters to an event intended to amplify her campaign message that lower taxes and less regulation are the only ways to spur economic recovery.

It was the first time since her primary victory that she had agreed to mingle with the media. Political observers speculated it might signal a shift in Angle’s post-primary strategy of using the media solely as fundraising mechanisms.

Alas, Angle’s more media-friendly moment was over almost as soon as it began.

In the warehouse of a family-owned clean diesel manufacturer in Sparks, Angle delivered a three-minute speech on her desire to permanently repeal the estate tax. When invited by the final speaker to stay and answer a few questions, she turned on her heel and rushed out a back door with a small cadre of staff members.

Reporters, including one who is six months pregnant, chased after her, calling out questions on unemployment benefits and other topics she has largely refused to address.

Brief though it may have been, the event was one of her first efforts to illustrate her philosophy that government’s role in the economy is largely to stay out of the way of the private sector.

Angle’s laissez-faire approach to the economy amid the worst recession in Nevada since the Great Depression has prompted repeated attacks from her opponent, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid. Citing Angle’s claim that it wouldn’t be her task as U.S. senator to create jobs, Reid argues Angle would merely stand by and watch as the ranks of Nevada’s unemployed grow.

Those attacks have gone largely unanswered as Angle has focused on fundraising and building a campaign organization.

Wednesday, Dick Patten, president of the American Family Business Institute, which organized the news conference, did some arguing on Angle’s behalf. Patten claimed that repealing the estate tax, a proposal Angle supports, could create 1.5 million jobs.

The estate tax, which has been dormant this year, is set to resume in 2011 at a 55 percent rate with a $1 million exemption. Congress is expected to reconsider the tax, with many Democrats, including Reid, favoring a continuation of the 2009 rate of 45 percent with a $3.5 million exemption.

Patten based his jobs claim on a 2009 study by former Congressional Budget Office economist Douglas Holtz-Eakin, who explored the disincentive the estate tax poses for entrepreneurs contemplating investing in their businesses. The study, paid for by the institute’s nonprofit arm, contends the tax motivates them to reduce the size of their estates by spending on leisure or other things rather than investing in a business that would be subject to the 55 percent tax.

The example at hand Wednesday was Peter Gunnerman, who owns Advanced Refining Concepts with his 82-year-old father and whose business was the site for the news conference.

Gunnerman said he would be forced to close the business and lay off 33 employees should his father die with the 55 percent estate tax in place. “If I’m hit with a 55 percent death tax, everything you see here disappears.”

When pressed, Gunnerman acknowledged he would seek “loopholes” such as gifting some of the estate to avoid the tax consequence and keep his business running. But he said loopholes aren’t good policy.

Proponents of the tax argue that the Holtz-Eakin study relied on faulty data, namely that most small businesses aren’t subject to the tax because of a sizable exemption and, therefore, these entrepreneurs aren’t under any disincentive to invest in their businesses. Rather, the tax targets the country’s wealthiest families, proponents argue.

With the $3.5 million exemption, a wealthy heir “would receiving more tax-free than the average worker earns in two lifetimes,” said Lee Farris, estate tax policy coordinator for United for a Fair Economy, which is lobbying Congress to reinstate the tax.

Reid spokesman Jon Summers called Angle a hypocrite for advocating a repeal of the tax and not offering a way to pay for it.

“You know what her approach would also do? It would add about $500 billion to the deficit,” Summers said. “Which is a pretty high price to pay just to give Paris Hilton a tax cut.”

During the event, Angle stated that the tax would cost 13,000 jobs in Nevada. “That is a true mistake to not go forward with something that can save at least 13,000 jobs here in Nevada when we are suffering under an unemployment rate of 14.2 percent,” she said.

Patten said the Holtz-Eakin study puts the Nevada jobs loss at 9,995 jobs. And Angle offered nothing to support her 13,000 figure.

She didn’t stick around long enough to field any follow-up questions about it.

“We’re running behind, I’m sorry,” her spokesman, Jerry Stacy, muttered as Angle stared at the ground, ignoring questions.

Then she was gone.

New Hampshire Union Leader A-1: Lamontagne takes aim at rival Ayotte

MANCHESTER – Ovide Lamontagne took aim yesterday at Kelly Ayotte, one of his rivals for the Republican nomination for U.S. Senate, calling her a "liberal" and a big-government politician.

Too much of Democrat John Lynch rubbed off on Ayotte when she served as his attorney general, according to Lamontagne, trying to claim the "true conservative" brand after Ayotte won the support Monday of former vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin.

"Sarah Palin's endorsement doesn't a conservative make," he said.

Lamontagne accused Ayotte, as attorney general, of actively promoting the $787 billion federal stimulus spending package, a red flag for a lack of overall fiscal discipline.

"I would have said, 'Governor, find somebody else to do this,'" he said. 'I'm the attorney general of New Hampshire. I represent the people and the state of New Hampshire. I'm not your lawyer.'"

Lamontagne, in meeting with editorial writers and a reporter at the New Hampshire Union Leader, devoted more criticism to Ayotte than the Democrat in the race, U.S. Rep. Paul Hodes. At one point he was asked about violating Ronald Reagan's 11th Commandment: Thou shalt not speak ill of any fellow Republican. He replied that Reagan was willing to challenge his opponents on the issues.

"You've got to be willing to do that," he said. "If you're not willing to do that in an election cycle, how are you going to do that if you're down with a bunch of colleagues in the U.S. Senate?"

Despite being a well-known Manchester lawyer, a former chairman of the state Board of Education, and the GOP nominee for governor in 1996, Lamontagne acknowledged he's still building name recognition. He promised a campaign of handshakes and shoe leather -- an operating model partly due to his shoe-string budget, at least compared to the millions raised by Republican rivals Ayotte of Nashua and businessmen Jim Bender of Hollis and Bill Binnie of Rye.

Ayotte, as a perceived front-runner, has a bulls-eye on her back on the road to the Sept. 14 primary. Bender has also criticized her, and Binnie has a new contrast ad that targets the 40-year-old mother of two, who is running for her first elective office.

Jeff Grappone, a spokesman for Ayotte, called Lamontagne's continued offensive a desperate attempt to jumpstart his campaign.

"Kelly Ayotte demonstrated tough, conservative leadership during her time as attorney general," he said. "That's exactly what she will bring to the U.S. Senate. Kelly will roll up her sleeves to stop the bailouts, stop the pork, repeal the stimulus, and repeal ObamaCare. She's the only candidate in the race who has actually cleared a homeowner for defending his home, and she was praised by the NRA when she became the only AG in the Northeast to call on Eric Holder to not reinstate the ban on semi-automatic firearms. Kelly will continue to be a strong supporter of Second Amendment rights in the U.S. Senate."

Lamontagne had also questioned Ayotte's stand on the "castle doctrine," the use of deadly force to defend oneself in the home.

He speaks often of authenticity, or the lack of it in politics. To that end, Lamontagne offered some positions that run counter to the establishment, such as his call to eliminate the U.S. Department of Education. In the 1990s, when the federal government was offering Goals 2000 funding, what he called the education stimulus of the day, Lamontagne said he led the opposition to it.

"I do not think the federal government has a role to play in elementary and secondary education in the United States," he said. "We need to devolve power from Washington back to the states."

Lamontagne said he also favors privatizing Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae, thinks the new financial regulatory reform President Obama signed into law yesterday is a bureaucratic mess that may lead to more bailouts, and pledged to repeal the landmark health care reform and the federal stimulus package, using any unspent money for tax relief or the deficit.

Voters, he said, are eager to take back their government. "I think we are undergoing a constitutional renaissance," he said. "People come to meetings with the Constitution, they cite versions of the Constitution, or they go back to the Federalist Papers, and isn't it really human nature that when you have a crisis, or you think you have a crisis, you go back to the basics."

New York Times: A Senate Run Brings Wrestling Into the Spotlight

In his heyday, Allen Ray Sarven appeared regularly on the World Wrestling Entertainment circuit, flattening opponents with diving leg drops from atop the ropes.

But years of bounding around the ring took a toll, leaving Mr. Sarven with neurological damage that caused numbness on his right side, hearing loss and memory problems.

Eventually, Mr. Sarven, 46, met the fate of other wrestlers considered no longer of use to the W.W.E.: his contract was not renewed and he was eliminated from the company’s wrestling roster — with no health insurance or retirement benefits to show for his years in the ring.

“Everybody believes that, physically, wrestling is fake; that nobody gets harmed,” said Mr. Sarven, who said his experience suggested otherwise.

Over the past quarter century, Vince and Linda E. McMahon have built the W.W.E. from a small regional operation into a $1.2 billion empire operating in 145 countries. But along the way, the McMahons have become known for hard-nosed tactics and have been accused of putting profits ahead of the well-being of the wrestlers who attract millions of fans with their daredevil stunts and cartoonishly sculpted physiques.

With Ms. McMahon all but certain to be the Republican candidate for the United States Senate in Connecticut, the W.W.E., its treatment of its work force and the way it came to dominate the industry are drawing renewed scrutiny.

“It is a very financially successful company,” said Dave Meltzer, the editor of Wrestling Observer Newsletter, which covers the industry. “But, boy, there were a lot of bodies discarded in the building of that company.”

Ms. McMahon defended her record at the company and said she and her husband had always looked out for the health and safety of those who worked for them.

“We of course had a responsibility to our shareholders,” she said. “But every good chief executive understands that in addition to maintaining profitability, companies that hope to be successful in the long term absolutely have to put people first.”

Ms. McMahon, who is making her first bid for public office, highlights her stewardship of W.W.E., saying it gave her the skills needed to create jobs and stimulate the economy.

And in an interview, she described the W.W.E. as her “life’s work,” adding, “One of the things missing today in some of our leaders is real-life experiences.”

Ms. McMahon, 61, has generated excitement among Republicans nationally, with her splashy advertisements and vast wealth. She has already poured more than $20 million of her own money into the race.

There is no question the McMahons showed boldness and shrewdness as they led the W.W.E. during a period of tremendous growth. The cable channel’s highest-rated show draws 5.5 million viewers a week. The company also generates millions from sold-out live shows broadcast on pay-per-view television, and from merchandise that includes action figures and sleeping bags.

Transforming Wrestling

The McMahons entered the industry in 1982, after a series of bad investments and a bankruptcy filing. They took over a small wrestling operation from Mr. McMahon’s father, one of many regional outfits that generally stuck to their own territories at the time.

They then shook up the industry by going national, producing events all around the country and engendering bitterness from rivals.

And while their competitors made much of their money through sales of tickets to live events, the McMahons were among the first to seize on new revenue sources: television syndication of wrestling events, followed by closed-circuit and pay-per-view broadcasting, which led them to develop their own cable television programming.

But one of the shrewdest strategies the company pursued was spearheaded by Ms. McMahon, when the W.W.E., in the 1980s, confronted a thicket of regulations from various state athletic commissions, requiring things like physical exams of wrestlers weeks before they would appear, and the stationing of state-approved doctors ringside during matches.

Ms. McMahon told regulators something few in the industry would say openly at the time: wrestling matches were scripted shows and not athletic competitions that required the kind of oversight that, say, boxing required. The strategy worked. Today, the W.W.E. operates in 29 states without the supervision of state athletic boards or commissions, which also frees the company from the licensing fees imposed by some states.

“This was the first public admission by somebody in that business that they were an entertainment and not a sport,” said Dick Ebersol, the chairman of NBC Universal Sports, who has collaborated on projects with the McMahons. “Her work in this area got them out of a lot of needless sporting regulation.”

But the McMahons’ approach toward its wrestlers has drawn criticism from former wrestlers, government officials and others.

Like many other wrestling promoters, they classify their wrestlers — they have some 140 or 150 under exclusive contract at any one time — as independent contractors, rather than employees, freeing the company from paying health insurance, Social Security and Medicare contributions and unemployment insurance.

That means the wrestlers, many of whom experience injuries and long-term health problems, must find health insurance, and they have no automatic retirement benefits to lean on when they can no longer climb into the ring, according to industry experts.

While big stars in the W.W.E. can land contracts worth more than $1 million annually, others earn less, with base salaries starting at about $35,000 for wrestlers in the developmental program. “Most of them are not wealthy and have relatively short careers,” Mr. Meltzer said. “It’s a hard profession.”

Mr. Sarven, the former wrestler, said: “The health care industry does not really care for wrestlers or athletes because they consider them obviously high risk for injuries. If you’re able to get a company to insure you, the premiums are exorbitant.”

The company has also been accused of looking the other way as wrestlers, feeling pressured to maintain the pumped-up bodies showcased in the W.W.E., turned to steroids.

The most damaging accusations grew out of a Congressional committee investigation in 2007 into professional wrestling, which concluded that steroid use was “pervasive” among wrestlers and that the industry had refused to address the problem.

The findings, from Representative Henry A. Waxman, Democrat of California, who was then the chairman of the House Committee on Government Reform and Oversight, was especially critical of the W.W.E., describing how, six months after announcing a steroid-testing policy, the company relaxed the rules to let wrestlers suspended for steroid use appear at W.W.E. pay-per-view events.

The company said it did so merely to allow wrestlers to finish story lines that were under way, and later reinstated the policy.

In an interview with the committee’s staff, Ms. McMahon was pressed to explain why the W.W.E. had abandoned another drug testing program in the 1990s. She told them the program was too costly, and few wrestlers were testing positive.

“You are doing this and expending these resources and you are coming back almost all the time to negatives,” she said, according to a transcript. “It really became at that time, O.K., let’s utilize these dollars more in our marketing effort. Let’s build our pay-per-view business. Let’s redirect these dollars, so that the cost-effective aspect of it just didn’t seem to be there.”

The committee staff asked her husband whether there were any known health risks associated with steroids. “I don’t know; I am not a doctor,” Mr. McMahon responded.

Jerry McDevitt, a lawyer for W.W.E., criticized the inquiry, saying Mr. Waxman had already made up his mind about the issues and that the committee staff member who questioned Mr. McMahon was trying to put words in his mouth.

“He’s a blowhard,” he said of Mr. Waxman.

Obstacles to Organizing

Other challenges to the McMahons have come from the wrestlers themselves, some of whom have sought to obtain better conditions for themselves and their colleagues.

But those efforts have made little progress, in part because wrestlers are wary of crossing the couple; the McMahons dominate the business, and require wrestlers to sign exclusive contracts, meaning that those who want a career in the industry have few other options for employment.

In the 1980s, Jesse Ventura, then a W.W.E. wrestler and later the governor of Minnesota, tried to organize his fellow wrestlers in a union, but found it hard to find wrestlers willing to join him.

“It just about cost him his career,” Kevin Nash, a former W.W.E. star known as Big Sexy, said of Mr. Ventura.

Mr. Ventura declined to be interviewed.

Irvin Muchnick, who has written several books on the wrestling industry, said wrestlers had little leverage without a union. Noting that the W.W.E. has a near-monopoly on the industry, he said, “So you don’t have 30 different teams vying for top talent as you do in other sports.”

But wrestling culture is infused with a tough-minded individualism, and some are ambivalent about organizing. Mr. Sarven, the former W.W.E. wrestler, said that while he believed wrestlers needed better benefits and protections, they were willingly taking the risks that went along with this work.

“It would be nice if the promoters were responsible for it, but let me ask you this: Was the promoter responsible for the wrestler becoming a wrestler?” said Mr. Sarven, who worked briefly as a W.W.E. trainer after being dropped from the wrestling roster. He now wrestles for other promoters.

In 2008, a group of former wrestlers filed a suit against the W.W.E., claiming that it had deprived them of benefits by misclassifying them as independent contractors instead of employees. The case was dismissed.

Booker T. Huffman, a W.W.E. veteran, said he left the W.W.E. a few years ago because of the relentless pace.

“I didn’t want to be one of those guys who gets chewed up and spit out,” Mr. Huffman, 45, said in an interview. “Every other sport has off seasons. But with the W.W.E., it’s brutal. It’s taxing, mentally and physically.”

In interviews, W.W.E. officials and the McMahons defended the company and its treatment of wrestlers, saying they had transformed and modernized the industry, offering wrestlers lucrative contracts, merchandising deals, royalty payments and appearance fees unheard of 25 years ago.

Ms. McMahon said that much of the criticism came from people who were simply unaware of how much the industry had changed. And while the company does not provide health coverage to its wrestlers, she said that it did pay for treatment of injuries that they sustained in the ring.

“This particular industry has had a lot of evolution,” she said. “W.W.E. clearly wants to maintain the health and wellness of this particular talent.”

Ms. McMahon also defended the company’s classification of its wrestlers as contractors, noting that they are often represented by agents and should be viewed like singers, golfers or tennis players. It is a longstanding practice in the industry, W.W.E. officials said, adding that the company holds regular seminars to help wrestlers pick appropriate health insurance plans and manage their finances.

The McMahons also point out that they have instituted measures intended to ensure the well-being of its former and current wrestlers. In 2006, W.W.E. established a drug, alcohol and cardiac screening program after one of its biggest stars, Eddie Guerrero, 38, was found dead in his hotel room. An autopsy found that he had heart disease that critics say may have been related to the abuse of steroids and pain medication.

Ms. McMahon, who worked as a legal secretary, a supermarket cashier and a jewelry store manager before joining the wrestling industry, rejects the notion that she was driven by the bottom line at W.W.E., saying the company could not have succeeded had it not looked after its employees. She and her husband own 59 percent of the company’s publicly traded stock.

Aid Efforts Criticized

The company has also pledged to provide treatment for current and former wrestlers struggling with addictions. But some wrestlers and their families deride that effort as window dressing.

In 2008, Chris Klucsarits, a former W.W.E. star, sought help through the assistance program. At the time, Mr. Klucsarits, known as Chris Kanyon in the ring, was suffering from depression, which he had battled for several years after being dropped from the W.W.E. roster because of injuries.

But Mr. Klucsarits never heard back from the company and, in April, was found dead in his Queens apartment alongside a suicide note, according to his brother Ken. “It didn’t seem like they were interested in dealing with him at any level,” his brother said in a recent interview, referring to W.W.E.

Company officials said they did not contact Mr. Klucsarits after his inquiry because at the time, Mr. Klucsarits was involved in the lawsuit against the W.W.E. over the wrestlers’ status as independent contractors. It did reach out to his lawyer, and noted that the rehab program is for substance abuse not mental health issues.

Many current and former wrestlers declined to speak on the record for this article, expressing worry that they would anger the McMahons.

Others said they had given up on the company changing and were trying a different approach.

Dawn Marie Damatta, who was at one time on the W.W.E. roster, recalled attending an event in Chicago a few years ago where retired wrestlers were signing autographs for fans.

There, she spotted a legend of the sport dozing off behind an autograph table before the man’s agent pushed him into the bathroom in a wheelchair.

“I said, ‘This man should be enjoying his life, he should be enjoying the fruits of his labor,’ ” she said. “Instead, he is there signing autographs for $20.”

Ms. Damatta started a charity called Wrestlers Rescue, to help cover health care and other basic needs of retired wrestlers. Still, she wishes that there was some oversight of the industry.

“Who calls this entertainment? Vince McMahon,” she said. “Why? When sports regulators come after W.W.E., he can say we are entertainment. But this is as grueling as football, and it has a huge impact on the brain and body.”

Sen. Robert Menendez on Meet The Press

Senator Robert Menendez, Chairman of the DSCC, appeared on Meet The Press with David Gregory on Sunday.

Highlights from the interview follow, and you can watch the interview here:

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

On the current state of the economy:

Well, look, there's a lot of people hurting in this country, and we realize that, and that's why we've been working to try to change the economy that we inherited. You know, but this will be a choice election because I know my Republican colleagues would like to have everybody forget that their candidates are on the ballot, but their candidates will be on the ballot. And it's not just talking about President Bush, it's the policies that they espouse that are in essence Bush's policies. Those led us to a 72 percent increase in the debt from $5.7 trillion to $9.8 trillion when Bush left. It led us to a massive elimination of the surplus that Bill Clinton gave George Bush, and he had a $1.5 trillion deficit when he left office. And so our Republican colleagues, who had their hands on the wheel and drove the car off the cliff into the Grand Canyon and the huge crater, don't want to take responsibility. It's time that they did.

On the Republican aversion to letting the Bush tax cuts expire:

You know, when, when the number two Republican in the Senate, Jon Kyl, says, "We don't have to pay for that. We don't have to pay for it," you know, I am tired of listening to the lectures about spending and debt when they wracked up record debt, when they are willing to put $700 billion of debt on the next generation, and when you don't have to pay for tax cuts for the wealthiest people in the country, but you can't help working Americans trying to get a job who presently are unemployed.

On the new health care law passed by Congress this year:

Well, I think, actually, when you look at the choice between where the president has taken the country from what he inherited vs. what our colleagues espouse, which is in essence the Bush voodoo economics, the reality is, in that choice, they have a very clear preference for the president's economic policies. Let me answer the question that my dear friend John wouldn't. Yes, they want to repeal health care, and they say replace. Well, you'll have a whole host of issues that you enjoy today that won't be enjoyed anymore. You won't see seniors closing that prescription drug gap that they have, you won't be able to have pre-existing conditions no longer be a bar to you getting insurance; you won't have a child born at birth who now will be able never--if they have a defect--to no longer be denied insurance. And yes, we have cost controls in that bill. On Wall Street reform, look, two weeks before, two weeks before the Wall Street reform bill was passed, you know, a hedge fund manager ultimately raised a million dollars for Republican candidates two weeks before the bill was being voted on, and they tried to stop us four times in the Senate before we got the Wall Street reform. I think that people in America believe in a free market as we as Democrats do, but there's a difference between a free market and a free fall market.

GOP House Leader Already Calling To Repeal Wall Street Reform

With the landmark financial regulatory reform bill having just passed the Senate, one of the nation’s most powerful Republicans is already seeking to repeal it.

Wall Street reform legislation provides strong consumer financial protections; brings the risky trading of derivatives, which helped trigger the crisis, into the light of day; provides the authority to wind down firms whose collapse would threaten the entire financial system; and ends taxpayer-funded bailouts.

Yet the man who hopes to be the next Speaker of the House, Republican John Boehner, already wants to get rid of it:

"I think it ought to be repealed," said House Minority Leader John Boehner, in response to a question from TPMDC, at his weekly press conference this morning.

Evidently for John Boehner, shilling for the big banks takes precedence over protecting consumers and preventing financial crises.

So the question is, will Republican Senate candidates stand with Boehner in his call for repealing financial regulatory reform?

The Year of the (Anti) Woman?

You NEED to watch this video, but be warned. It’s disturbing and shocking, and not at all appropriate for children:

Republican Linda McMahon is running for the United States Senate, and she’s funding her race with the millions she earned peddling the "entertainment" you just watched to kids. Outrageous violence. Explicit sexual content. Extremely misogynistic story lines. One has to wonder, did more graphic, more anti-woman programming lead to higher profits for Linda McMahon and her “entertainment” enterprise?

The total disrespect for women – and the children watching – is disgusting.

But this is only the most recent example of disturbing Republican views on women and women’s issues. You might call it “The Republican Anti-Woman Year.”

For example:

· Sen. David Vitter – he of prostitution-scandal fame – has yet to explain why he kept employing an aide for TWO YEARS after the aide held a woman hostage for 90 minutes and slashed her neck with a knife. And here’s the ultimate irony: The aid was assigned to work on WOMEN’S ISSUES.

· Sharron Angle – running for the Senate in Nevada – suggested that women who are raped – including teenage incest victims – shouldn’t even be allowed to consider getting an abortion. Instead, they should just “turn a lemon situation into lemonade.” Outrageous.

· 30 Republican senators voted AGAINST the Franken amendment – which would withhold defense contracts from companies that prevented employees who were raped from having their day in court. Those senators include a number of Republicans seeking re-election, including once again, Sen. Vitter, as well as Sen. Richard Burr of North Carolina and Sen. Jim DeMint of South Carolina.

There’s no other conclusion we can draw: Republicans are running a bunch of candidates who have an utter lack of respect for women.

Poll: Sestak Catches Toomey In Pennsylvania

Democratic Rep. Joe Sestak has gained eight points on Republican Pat Toomey since April and is now in a dead heat with former Wall Street derivatives trader and Congressman Pat Toomey, according to polling from Quinnipiac University.

Quinnipiac’s latest poll shows Sestak and Toomey both receiving 43% of the vote. In May, the poll showed Toomey with a two-point edge, and in April, Toomey sported an eight-point lead.

Apparently Pennsylvanians are increasingly less enamored of the prospect of putting Wall Street loyalist Pat Toomey in the Senate. Toomey’s loyalty to big banks and big corporations has already cost taxpayers millions of jobs and lined the pockets of his Wall Street friends; it seems Pennsylvania has had enough.

Sharron Angle's Lemonade Stand

Sharron Angle’s bizarre obsession with lemonade has been making a great deal of news lately, and not in a good way.

Angle’s evidently favorite metaphor – to “make lemonade out of lemons” – was first employed on the highly controversial issue of reprocessing nuclear waste at Yucca Mountain, a cause to which the majority of Nevadans are strenuously opposed.

Angle said Nevada should "make lemonade out of lemons" and consider turning Yucca Mountain into a reprocessing facility instead of a nuclear waste repository to spur the economy and create jobs.

She next trotted out her beloved metaphor in an even more shocking circumstance, during a June radio interview, Angle suggested that teenage rape victims make “a lemon situation into lemonade” by carrying a pregnancy to term.

Angle is so fond of using this metaphor in wildly inappropriate circumstances, we can only guess when she’ll employ it next.

Perhaps if she loses the election, she will make lemonade out of lemons by proposing armed insurrection with Second Amendment remedies.

Or since she dislikes government programs so intensely, perhaps she will make lemonade out of lemons by phasing out Social Security and Medicare.

Or when GOP Senators express pessimism about her electoral chances, she’ll make lemonade from lemons by suggesting her detractors have “outlived their usefulness”.

Well, That Explains Everything!

In the wake of the devastating Gulf Coast oil spill, Wisconsin Republican Ron Johnson came out as one of the strongest defenders of BP in the country. Johnson not only opposed the President’s plan to make BP pay for the damage caused to the Gulf Coast, but inexplicably decided to support drilling for oil in Lake Michigan, a proposal potentially devastating to Wisconsin’s shores.

Why would Johnson emerge as such a loyal defender of BP and the oil industry?

Because Big Oil is lining his pockets, that’s why. Apparently, Johnson owns between $116,000 and $315,000 of BP stock.

No wonder he thinks that “ this is not the time to be beating up on those guys [BP], quite honestly”…he’s got money riding on BP, and he is putting his own financial interest ahead of the interests of Wisconsin and the nation.

Sharron Angle In Her Own Words

What a week for Sharron Angle!

First, she said she would not be in the business of creating jobs as a senator, and admitted she would not have acted to save 22,000 jobs at CityCenter.

Subsequently, Angle - who wants abortion banned under all circumstances - suggested that a 13-year-old girl who was raped by her father should just turn "a lemon situation into lemonade." This is the same woman who suggested that getting pregnant after a rape just might be "God's plan."

Finally, in another radio appearance, Angle called British Petroleum's $20 billion escrow account to compensate oil spill victims a "slush fund," and agreed with a caller who accused President Obama of "extortion." National Republicans must be closely monitoring all her statements, because a few hours later, she did a 180-degree flip-flop, calling the former "slush fund" an "important first step."

Sharron Angle - too extreme for Nevada.

David Vitter Still Not Telling The Truth

Fourteen days since an ABC News report revealed that U.S. Senator David Vitter protected his women’s outreach coordinator for more than two years after he learned that Brent Furer stabbed, beat and threatened his girlfriend, Senator Vitter still refuses to answer questions related to the scandal.

With the staffer scandal in Senator David Vitter’s office heating up by the day, the embattled junior senator from Louisiana filed his reelection papers today in Baton Rouge and raised even more eyebrows by ducking questions from the press and even lying about the staffer’s role in his office. According to the Times-Picayune: Vitter declined to directly answer questions about the incident, except to refute media reports that Furer was assigned to handle women's issues in his office.

But multiple third party groups confirm that Furer indeed was in charge of women’s issues in Senator Vitter’s office:

In fact, according to ABC News, the Louisiana Coalition Against Domestic Violence Executive Director Beth Meeks had been in Washington last month and that Vitter had assigned Furer to meet with her to discuss the senator's views on domestic violence legislation. Meeks told ABC News that said “she was advised the Furer was the senator's point man on women's issues.”

Hall of Shame: GOP Caucus

Because of its stubborn refusal to help the unemployed, the Senate Republican Caucus is the latest inductee into the DSCC’s Hall of Shame.

Bartering is Back!

Get those roosters ready. Bartering is back!

Senate candidate Sue Lowden’s suggestion that assorted farm animals might be an important part of health care reform gave Nevada Republicans enough pause that they instead chose Sharron Angle as their nominee. But it seems that Lowden isn’t the only fan of trading cows for CAT scans.

Enter Kentucky Republican Rand Paul. Paul’s been in the news plenty for his abhorrent views on the 1964 Civil Rights Act, and his criticism of President Obama’s treatment of British Petroleum. But a 2002 interview suggests that Paul also supports trading chickens for checkups.

“We need to get insurance of out of the way and let the consumer interact with their doctor the way they did basically before World War II,” Paul said.

This is the exact same argument voiced by Lowden, who said that “before we all started having healthcare, in the olden days, our grandparents, they would bring a chicken to the doctor.”

It would be interesting to know if Paul – an eye doctor – would be willing to accept goats for glaucoma treatment. We do know that he’s happy to take government payments in the form of Medicare. In fact, payments to physicians seems to be the only government spending he doesn’t want to cut. Shocking.

Sen. Vitter, R-BP

It’s one of the largest man-made disasters ever, and Sen. David Vitter, R-LA, is worried about protection. Not protecting the oceans. Not protecting the beaches. Not protecting the small business owners in his state.

Nope. Vitter is concerned about protecting British Petroleum – a foreign corporation.

Vitter wants the United States Senate to pass a liability cap. His legislation would limit BP’s liability to the equivalent of BP’s last four quarters of profit, because making a corporation pay to fully clean up its mess just seems so … unfair. Or something.

Luckily, Charlie Melancon, who’s running to replace Vitter in the Senate, is fighting for Louisianans, not oil corporations. Melancon supports lifting the liability cap on oil companies that cause spills, and he’s been highly critical of BP since the spill began. “It doesn’t appear they have been honest with us from the start,” Melancon told a local TV station.

Louisianans have a clear choice in November. They can side with Vitter, the senator for BP, or they can side with Melancon, who will be the senator for all the people of Louisiana.

First Chickengate, Now Busgate

Sue Lowden sure knows how to keep herself in the headlines – but not in a good way.

First, the Nevada Republican Senate candidate suggested that the cure for our ailing health care system is bartering with your doctor. Such as: I’ll give you three chickens if you give me a checkup, Doc. Not surprisingly, Democrats – and Lowden’s main Republican competitor, Danny Tarkanian – seized upon this tidbit, and made Lowden a national laughingstock.

That was Chickengate. Now, here comes Busgate. It appears that Lowden may have broken campaign finance laws by taking a supporter’s luxury RV to tool around Nevada in comfort and style.

“A campaign contributor is ‘leasing’ Lowden the luxury RV she is using as her campaign bus, according to the Lowden campaign. But her name is on the title with the supporter, Carl Guiduci, which would indicate they co-own the bus,” the Las Vegas Sun reported.

Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington said Lowden broke the law.

“He gave it to her. She owns it. She’s on the title, and it’s in her custody and control. It’s an excessive campaign contribution,” said Melanie Sloan, CREW’s executive director.

Lowden’s campaign said use of the RV was an “in-kind” contribution that doesn’t violate any rules. In-kind campaign contributions are limited by law to $2,400 per person. Similar luxury RVs cost more than $100,000.

The 2001 Monaco RV has a kitchen, bed, shower and $6,800 in custom signage featuring Lowden’s smiling face.

Hall of Shame: Rand Paul

Rand Paul opposes the Civil Rights Act. He opposes the Americans with Disabilities Act. He opposes Occupational Safety and Health Administration regulations. This radical ideology has earned him a place of dishonor in our Hall of Shame.

Hall of Shame: Dino Rossi

Dino Rossi’s first campaign hire is former lobbyist for Enron -- a move that puts him in the DSCC Hall of Shame.

GOP Scalded by Tea

Republicans soon might wish the Tea Party had never started.

On Saturday, three-term Republican Sen. Bob Bennett failed to get enough votes to compete in the Utah GOP primary on June 22. Why? He just wasn’t conservative enough for a party increasingly driven by the fringe right.

“He’s a moderate, and I don't want a moderate,” delegate Pam Wilson told Politico. “I don’t want somebody on the fence. I want someone completely on the right. I get the rhetoric in Washington that he’s a conservative. I don’t care. I want a conservative who I think is a conservative.”

Utah’s Republican primary voters will choose between Tim Bridgewater and Mike Lee. Both advocate revoking citizenship rights for children of undocumented workers born in the United States, shutting down the Department of Education and moving to a highly regressive “flat tax” or "fair tax."

Utah isn’t the only state where the Republican Party is being hijacked:

· In Kentucky, Tea Party activists have lined up behind the Senate candidacy of Rand Paul, son of Texas Congressman Ron Paul. Paul – who opposes the 1964 Civil Rights Act, wants an electric fence on our nation’s borders and wants to abolish the Department of Education – is leading establishment Republican pick Trey Grayson in recent polls. Kentucky’s primary election is May 18.

· In Maine, delegates to the state’s GOP convention decided to dump the party’s platform in favor of one that’s Tea Party approved. According to the Maine Politics blog, the new platform is a mixture of “right-wing fringe policies, libertarian buzzwords and outright conspiracy theories.” It added that “Dan Billings, who has served as an attorney for the Maine GOP, called the new platform ‘wack job pablum’ and ‘nutcase stuff.’”

Outside Money Flowing In

DSCC Rant

If you think outside spending has been bad in the past few elections, you ain’t seen nothing yet. According to the Campaign Media Analysis Group, for every dollar outside groups spent during this period in the 2006 elections, they’re currently spending four.

Conservative groups such as Club for Growth, Republican Majority Campaign and Citizens United Political Victory Fund are already buying ads attacking Democratic candidates, and a brand-new group on the right, American Crossroads – advised by Karl Rove – recently announced that it will spend $50 million on races this year. Another conservative group, Americans for Job Security, plans to spend $10 million.

American Crossroads’ political director, Carl Forti, said: “It all goes into the area of conservatives feeling energy out of the environment. We couldn’t ask for a better environment heading into these last six months.”

Translation: Tea Partiers are mad, and they’re sending in checks. And those checks will mean more ads against our Democratic candidates.

Lobbyist Coats Finally Discloses Financial Information

DSCC Rant

Last month, all uber-lobbyist Dan Coats could say about how much he earned as a lobbyist was that he “can’t begin to tell you what that number was.” Now we know why he wasn’t all that eager to let Hoosiers peek into his financial records. Coats, who has spent the last decade or so living in Virginia and raking in the bucks on K Street, finally filed the paperwork required by the Senate Ethics Committee – a full 24 days after the deadline.

And yes, lobbying has put plenty of cash in his wallet.

According to the filing, Coats made almost a million bucks last year, including more than $821,000 in the past 16 months lobbying for big banks, oil companies and foreign governments. On top of that, he earned $100,000 in consulting fees to set up business deals with German firms, plus $100,000 in directors’ fees and up to $150,000 in stock options for serving on the boards of two companies.

For comparison’s sake: the median household income in Indiana in 2008 was just over $48,000, according to the U.S. Census Bureau.

So if you were a successful corporate lobbyist like Dan Coats, what could you do with all your cash? You could own a luxurious beach house in North Carolina, for one. Another benefit: Whipping out your checkbook and writing your campaign a $200,000 check, like Coats did last week.

Must be nice!

More Vitter Misbehavior?

Louisiana deserves a better senator.

It’s bad enough that Republican David Vitter admitted to a “serious sin” in 2007. Awkward. Now, there are more accusations of wrongdoing. Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington has filed a federal complaint against Vitter, accusing the senator of accepting illegal campaign contributions.

According to the complaint, officials from a California dry cleaning company tried to curry favor with Vitter by giving him nearly $40,000 last year. The Times-Picayune newspaper reported that one of the donors said the company – U.S. Dry Cleaning – later reimbursed his $4,800 contribution.

That’s illegal. And the Vitter campaign isn’t talking.

No state deserves this much embarrassment. It’s time for Louisiana to have a senator worthy of representing it in Washington, and we know just the guy: Charlie Melancon. Melancon first gained national attention when he helped lead efforts to assist Louisiana after Hurricanes Katrina and Rita. He’s a proud family man and experienced small business owner who knows how to get results. He’s also a fierce campaigner – most recently calling out Vitter for opposing financial reform legislation.

It’s time to retire Vitter. If he wants to embarrass himself, fine. But not a great state like Louisiana.

Transparency? Not So Much

The rocky rollout continues for uber lobbyist and Virginia?/North Carolina??/Indiana??? Senate candidate Dan Coats.

Coats, if you recall, has already been criticized by Democrats – and some unimpressed Republicans – for slamming the auto bailout (though he lobbied for it), slamming climate-change legislation (though he lobbied for it), lobbying for foreign governments, and telling a North Carolina audience that he wanted to retire to his lavish beachside home there, but not to let Hoosiers know.

But wait! There’s more! Now, Coats has missed the deadline to file his personal financial disclosure form. This form is important because it tells voters just how much Coats has made as a big-shot lobbyist, information Coats has yet to divulge.

So what does Coats do? Blames his lawyer. Coats said his attorney gave him incorrect information about when he needed to file. We’re not sure how “at least 30 days before the primary election” can be misinterpreted.

Coats just isn’t a details guy, evidently. Details like filing deadlines, and his income, seem to elude him. When asked by Fox Business Channel how much money he earns lobbying, Coats said: “I can’t begin to tell you what that number was.”

We’re not sure we’d trust Coats to remember other important details, like what Hoosiers need from their United States senator.

So did Coats accidentally miss the deadline? Or was he trying to keep damaging information from voters? Either way, so much for the full transparency he promised about his lobbying ties.

How Many Chickens is an MRI Worth?

DSCC Rant

We know that Republicans are gung-ho against “Obamacare” – their derisive term for the health care reforms recently signed into law. So what are they for? Turning the clock back. In one instance, waaaay back.

Senate candidate Sue Lowden wants to return our health care system to the ’50s – the 1850s. The Nevada Republican suggests that bartering might be an effective solution to our broken health care system.

That’s right. Bartering. If you need surgery, see if your doctor would accept a goat as payment.

In all fairness, that’s not her only suggestion. She also wants new “mandate-free” insurance policies, which we’re sure would be just dandy if you end up with cancer or some other dread disease and find out that – oops! Not covered!

Hall of Shame: John Ensign and Sue Lowden

Nevadans deserve better than John Ensign – and Sue Lowden. The two of them ought to be consigned to the dustbin of history – and the DSCC’s Hall of Shame.

Hall of Shame: Roy Blunt (Repeat Offender)

What will Missouri Congressman and Senate hopeful Roy Blunt do to fix America’s broken health care system? Absolutely nothing.

Hall of Shame: Richard Burr

North Carolina Republican Richard Burr offered his solution to the economic crisis– “withdraw all money from the bank”.

Hall of Shame: Norm Coleman

Now with even his own lawyers saying he'll lose, Norm Coleman is shamefully and spitefully refusing to admit defeat

Hall of Shame: David Vitter

It seems that Louisiana Republican David Vitter just can’t stop embarrassing himself or the people of his home state.

Hall of Shame: Roy Blunt

As more and more Americans are worrying about their homes, their health care, and their next paycheck, Missouri Republican Roy Blunt remains as clueless as he is shameless.