Having no training as a journalist, I make no effort to be objective. I tend to support leaders - conservative, moderate and liberal - who promote transparency, accountability and a bipartisan approach to government. I also appreciate pols who have the courage to say what's on their mind, even when it costs them a few votes. LV Congressman Charlie Dent is at or near the top of this list. He leads from the front, never hesitating to state his views, and constantly reaches out to his constituents.When I get a Dent news release, whether it's from his Congressional office, campaign or the NRCC, I'll usually weave snippets into an original story. But I always disclose my source. That's only fair to you. If something comes from a political campaign, even someone I like, it should be viewed with a little more skepticism than an actual news story. Especially when I'm the idiot posting it. Those of you who aren't buying what Charlie's selling can call me pro-Dent, which I am, but at least you know my source.
Imagine a blog that makes no disclosure at all. It spins you without bothering to tell you that it's just vomiting the slop some political campaign just fed it. Imagine that this blog pretends to be "independent."
Well, kiddies, this is where Lehigh Valley "Independent," a new blog, enters the fray. There are three authors. Hillary Kwiatek, a partisan Democrat who just lost a nasty race for Lehigh County Commissioner, has suddenly started blogging. She's so "independent" that nearly her entire campaign was financed by LC Exec Don Cunningham. Then we have Ryan O'Donnell, aka Rylock, a paid Democratic operative for Barack Obama and, until just a few weeks ago, Allentown Mayor Ed Pawlowski. O'Donnell could never bring himself to vote for a Republican. Rounding out this blogging triumvirate is George Soros employee Jonathan Geeting, who condescends to Lehigh Valley blue collars from his chambers in NYC. Geeting, incidentally, has objectively dismissed Congressman Dent as a "human shitstain."
Despite their own obvious biases, these bloggers insist they really are independent. Really! I just don't understand what the word "independent" really means.
On Wednesday, Kwiatek posted a blog called "Charlie and the Electric Factory." You see, her electric bill went up, and it's all Charlie's fault. Dent, when he was still in the state house, voted to deregulate electricity rates in 1996. So she concludes Dent is a dirty rat who apparently has ditched Big Oil and Big Insurance for Big Electric. "Next time someone tells you Charlie Dent is a nice guy, take a look at your electric bill," she snarls.
What Kwitek fails to point out is that every other member of the state house voted for deregulation, too. That's right. The final vote was 203 to zip. Even Lisa Boscola, who now wants to wrestle PPL execs in a vat of Budweiser, voted for it.
Why?
At that time, deregulation was all the rage. Bald guys who smoke pipes and look serious, insisted the competition would result in lower electricity rates. We bought it. Didn't turn out that way. Fortunately, Dent was part of a majority that voted against amendments that would have turned Pennsylvania into a California of the East, with all the problems that ensued there.
Dent blew it, along with everyone else. Now, with 20-20 hindsight, Kwiatek decides to blame this on Congressman Dent. Only him. She smugly tells me, "How anyone else voted is irrelevant." And Ryan O'Donnell goes through some goofy checklist. At the time, I told them their post reads more like a deceptive campaign ad than a news story.
Turns out I was right. I called Dent campaign manager Shawn Millan, and learned that John Callahan's campaign had been shopping that deregulation story at all the media outlets on Tuesday. Every point made by Hillary Kwiatek appears in a John Callahan for Congress news release, issued the day before her own story.
The newsies said thanks, but no thanks. It's a tad harsh to blame just Dent for a mistake made by everyone, conservatives and liberals, Democrats and Republicans.
So Hillary Kwiatek essentially posted the news release. But instead of being honest and telling you her source was John Callahan, she acts as though she was shocked by her electric bill and came up with all this stuff herself. This is spinning. It's dishonest, and no "independent" blogger would do it without telling you where he or she got her information. She even conned my pro-Callahan friend Rich Wilkins, who thanks her for information he had no idea was being spoon-fed by Callahan.
Kwiatek, as dutifully instructed in the Callahan news release, also goes on to claim that since Charlie Dent has accepted $67,600 from PPL during his Congressional career, he must have sold out. Congressman Dent has raised $6 million over this time, so PPL is about 1.1% of his total contributions.
Well, here's something else that Kwiatek forgets to tell you. She accepted $1,000 from Callahan in her failed Commissioner bid. Since that's 2.5% of her total, what does that make her? Based on her own reasoning, she's a sell out, too. What's worse, she never discloses her Callahan connection in an article slamming his opponent.
Her blog is about as independent as a Soviet satellite state, back in the bad old days. It's also unethical.
87 comments:
Do you know that today I finally understood what it was that Marie Antoinette said? For years I thought she said, "Let them eat cookies." That was the literal translation from the French. And of course everyone says, "Let them eat cake."
But sarcasm plays greatly on the French (and Arabic) language. She really tried to convey, "Let them eat dough!" (Actually, all of the left over dough from Her Majesty.)
That's how I feel about this post. Just a bunch of smokers and cake eaters. I am blue collar all the way. A pig dressed in a suit is still a pig.
The numbers don't lie, but they have to be put into proper context. Politics are dirty business.
I bet you will get a lot of slack for this article. But facts are facts. Whatever way you misconstrue them. Good article.
But Bernie, when you print one about me; at least give me a head's up.
Peace, ~~Alex
Fr. Alex, If she wants to claim she's "independent," then she should disclose that Cllahan is feeding her story lines. And if she wants to claim Dent sold out, then by her own reasoning she's a sell-out, too, and one who can't be bothered disclosing her very recent Callahan connection on a blog slamming his opponent.
Bernie,
I am in agreement with you. Reading that thread on their blog was upseting, and I am not a Dent or Callahan fan. I remember when everyone voted for deregulation. That is where your thread put Dent's actions into context.
Facts, inside of the big picture, put a better perspective of what went on at that present time. You can be on both sides of the fence at once.
Again, good article.
Peace, ~~Alex
my fault: You CAN'T be on both sides of the fence at once.
~~Alex
I'm struck by what a POS Cunningham is. He spent truckloads to get re-elected and almost lost to an unknown using change he found between seat cushions. Cunningham is a Rendell clone whose thug politics and deep pockets are being rejected by voters at every turn. How did he become such a known sleaze? And despite the best efforts of this space? It's fun to watch.
I thought that the post you refer to was ridiculous and hurts the credibility of a generally interesting blog (I actually feel that way about all of Hillary Kwiatek's posts... Ryan and Jon may be young, arrogant, and biased, but they are both good writers and I find their articles interesting to read unlike Ms. Kwiatek's posts which just read like a bitter hack trying to exact revenge on her poor readers).
But this post is a laugh-a-minute coming from you. You may think you "weave" press releases into "original stories" and have full disclosure, and so you get a pass on the blatant Dent-mouthpiecing that often appears here, but when it comes to the reposting of press releases, I don't find what you do to be that much different from what she did.
The difference is called disclosure. If I get a news release, I mention it. But of course you know that.
Dent voted for deregulation. Period. Boscola is pandering, but implicit in her pandering is an admission of casting a bad vote (at the least it was uneducated, at the worst it sold out pa taxpayers). It would be nice if Dent did the same. That is what a leader would do, not hide behind the 202 other people who voted the same way.
Hillary K. -- such a fraud.
So you think politicians shouldn't be held responsible for their votes if everyone else is wrong too? That's an interesting precedent.
To be honest, I have no idea whether Dent feels the same way now that he felt in '96. I also disagree that the 203 people who voted to deregulate in '96 were at best uneducated and at worst, sell-outs. At that time, the prevailing view was that deregulation would lead to lower costs for consumers. They were wrong, but so were most of the experts.
"you think politicians shouldn't be held responsible for their votes if everyone else is wrong too?"
No, Charlie owns that vote and has to take responsibility for it, but should not be singled out the way Kwiatek attempted to do. Moreover, she should have disclosed that (1)she was publishing a message being pandered by the Callaha camp; and (2) she herself rec'd $1,000 from Callahan.
Attached is the comment I wrote on the LV Blog. Their article is disingenuous. It seems that all the negative commenters refuse to recognize the energy environment in the 90s. To bad.
Anonymous said...
An interesting discussion. Several points of interest. During the period of the 40s, the 50s, and for the most part the 60s and the 70s, electric rates declined. Everyone was happy.
The energy component of electricity in the 70s was less than 2 cents a kWh. The future of pricing was complicated and there was,at the same time, enormous pressure being placed on electric power producers. Most of it was from industrial customers who no longer wanted to subsidize residential customers and government who wanted lower rates so as to keep industrial customers in their backyard.
So what happened? The availability of low cost fuels and environmental costs, both came into play at the same time.
For example, energy costs now average more than 6 to 7 cents a kWh, not counting higher costs for environmental control. As a comparison oil in the 50s was about $5 a barrel and today it is about $76 a barrel.
It is unfair and unrealistic to "blame" the electric industry. There were some of us in the business, unfortuately not many, that believed electricity should not be deregulated. Simply, electricity is not a commodity that can foster competition. Competition requires new enntrants into the market. Electic generation is just too expensive to encourage any new entrants.
In summary, the PPL CEO's compensation is only about 6% of the $115 million mentioned by Mr.O'Donnell. (Probably still to much but not unreasonable.) Competition in the energy business does not exist regardless of the fuel source. Green energy is not a viable alternative. And as noted by Mr O'Donnell states, almost every legislator voted for deregulation. To blame Charlie Dent for a vote that took place more than 20 years ago in a climate that was totally different,is simply not only not fair, but is ridiculous.
What we do need is more nuclear generation.
Bob Romancheck
It's not nice to slap Nazi collaborator Soros and his minions. Now you've gone and done it, Bernie. Nice knowing you. You'll probably be a Soros lampshade by Monday.
"They were wrong, but so were most of the experts."
Is Charlie willing to be a leader and admit this? Does he think his 1996 vote was a bad vote? Pointing to the 202 other bad voters makes Charlie Dent a follower, not a leader. There are plenty of other people who cast the same vote who now state that they regret doing so b/c it is hurting PA taxpayers.
Come on Charlie... be the leader you say you are!
I was puzzled by your comment and googled it. Apparently, Soros admitted, during a 60 minutes interviewt that as a 14 year-old boy in Hungary, he posed as a Christian to escape the Holocaust. He watched people being shipped off to death camps, and participated in property confiscation. "I would say that that's when my character was made." He had no feelings of remorse. " I had no sense of guilt."
I won't judge him bc it was a horrifying experience, he was just a boy, and his primary instinct is to survive.
Anon 11:45,
Actually, at this point, that 24 year-old vote is ancient history. The important point, in my view, is that a blogger parroted a Callahan newws release without disclosing that or the fact that Callahna gave her $1,000. It does not speak well of her "independence."
Frankly, it was a bad vote. But if you have to look back 24 years to find it, what does that say about you?
24 years? I am counting 14 (2010-1996). But let's not haggle over the details of when. Leaders lead at all times, whether it relates to something 14 (or 24) years old or not. Besides, it does underscore a key point: the votes of 5, 10, 15 and 25 years ago impact us today.
I want to know what he thinks. You always seem to have an ability to get an official comment from him or his people. How about holding him accountable for a past vote and asking about its impact today?
You are finding all kinds of excuses for Dent to avoid accountability. First you attack the source of the information. Then you seek to discredit the source as being biased. Now you are claiming that it happened so long ago that it doesn't matter. Well, to this taxpayer, it does matter and frankly, I don't care what the source is. If Dent isn't willing to talk about it, then he is avoiding accountability.
Go on, give us another excuse.
Sure, it matters. What happened 200years ago still matters. But you're not really interested in having Dent explain what I consider a poor vote 14 years ago, one he made along with everyone else. What you are really trying to do is persuade voters to dump him in favor of Callahan, who has yet to take a position on anything. So you scour Dent's record to find something - anything - that might embarrass him.
When newspapers rightly feel a vote Dent made along with everyone else is not particularly newsworthy, you feed it to a blogger who pretends she came up with this stuff herself, and fails to tell her readers that she also just got $1,000 from Callahan.
And that's the point of my story, not Dent's vote. It's a bout spinning. It's about being dishonest with people. It's about being forthright and upfront with readers and voters. I admit my bias. But even with that admission, I will tell my readers when I'm writing about something inspired by a news release. That's only fair.
Kwiatek failed that test. Come to think of it, so did Callahan.
Excuses, excuses, excuses. Excuses breed government with no accountability.
I am interested in knowing if Dent thinks it was a bad vote. He is not on record as saying so. I could care less if you think it is a bad vote or not.
But keep spinning ways to avoid the question. Does Charlie Dent regret that vote? My electricity rates jumped 30% b/c of that vote, far higher than any tax increase I have experienced lately. I have a right to know if my Congressman regrets a vote he made to facilitate that. You seem to disagree. As far as the Morning Call, they also tell me that crime isn't so bad in Allentown and that Ed Pawlowski has a handle on the city finances. They lack credibility in all matters of journalism. They will only pick up on this if Callahan sends a mailer or does a radio ad on the topic.
The really shady thing about the vote is that the culprits made sure the bomb didn't go off until many years later, so they'd never have to be held accountable for the consequences. But forget what he did in the past. Where's Dent now? He's not pushing for reregulation or anything that would help consumers. Not for banks or energy companies.
Bernie,
1. Kwatek was wrong, she should have disclosed.
2. Just because everyone else voted for deregulation, does not make it excusable. All it shows is that everyone in the State House at the time couldn't be bothered asking the hard questions. Why does it seem impossible for any elected official to ask one simple question: what are the unintended consequences/possible negative ramifications of a vote for (insert legislation here)?
3. Dent needs to take resposibility for the vote. He apparently didn't ask the right questions, or was not skeptical about the answers he received.
4. Just because you admit you are biased doesn't mean you should not be able to see beyond your bias when the facts do not add up. When was the last time you were ever (seriously) critical about Dent... or Angle ... or Morganelli ... or Giordano.
(1) Thank you. To me, this is the most important point, motre important than the actual vote. I have no problem with her or you promoting Callahan, but think a blogger has an obligation to disclose that she's promoting the message callahan wants preached. To do otherwise is dishonest.
(2) Agreed. But hindight is 20-20. Where the hell were you in '96? I know Dr Romancheck, who posted here, was at that time a PPL employee. He was nevertheless one of the few people to speak against deregulation, even visiting the Governor's office.His worries were that there would be no real competition and he was proved right. Bob Romancheck is one of the few people who can say, "I told you so." Was Callahan opposed to this then? Did he speak against deregulation? No. Every member of the state house thoght it was a good idea bc they felt it would increase competition and lower prices. You can call it "inexcusable," but even now, you only make your points anonymously.
(3) Agreed again. But where is Dent supposed to take responsibility? Where is he to reply to a Callahan news release so poorly written it does not even make it to the papers? Is he supposed to reply to Hillary Kwiatek, who just took $1,000 from Callahan? Is he supposed to answer the blogger at LV Independent who calls him a "human shitstain"? Is he supposed to answer the blogger there who wrote he could never vote for a Republican? It was a hit piece.
4) I do see beyond my bias when facts don't add up. I've posted blogs very critical of Morganelli. I'm surprised he still speaks to me. I've nailed Ron at times over the Sunshine Act, but you probably got me there. I do have a soft spot for the guy. I've disagreed very strongly w/ Dent over illegal immigration and his votes against employee free choice. I made fun of one of his news releases attacking Callahan for saying a naughty word. Even now, I'll say his '96 vote was a mistake. He may have a different view about that, and I will get it. As for Judge Giordano, what am I supposed to criticize? I featured his dispute with a neighbor here. Am I supposed to say he's a lousy coach or something?
All we want is Dent's response to his bad vote. As voters we deserve that much.
See, that wasn't so bad, was it.
The only two sources we have for this alleged "press release" are O'Hare (Dent's perk-y hagiographer) and Shawn Millan (Dent's campaign manager). If you want to accuse Kwiatek of plagiarism, please produce the original work. Isn't it at least possible that she could have read the press release, researched the data, found it accurate, and wrote a blog entry reflecting her findings?
Considering that, I have not seen anyone here dispute the factual content of the post. There are arguments about the context and presentation (big surprise that Dent's head cheerleader doesn't like seeing Charlie portrayed in a negative light!) but nothing at all challenging the veracity of her claims. If what Kwiatek wrote was accurate, what the hell does matter where she first received the information, especially considering all of it is a matter of public record?
"Independent"
means
"Democrat smart enough to realize the Democrat label is well on the way to making George Bush look like the world's greatest genius, ever"
Where is Callahan on the death questions? Charlie's a staunch supporter. Charlie likes abortions, gruesome testing on the remains, executions - even of the mentally disabled, and of course, war, war, war! Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan ...wherever! He's a progressive Republican from the old Rockefeller school who knows it's important to thin over-breeding herds. Is Callahan any different?
Actually, for 14 years PA's price caps that were part of the deregulation effort kept people's electric bills artificially low.
You know what, we could probably call it even.
Unless you live in a La-La land where electricity grows on trees.
3:29
Many people in the Lehigh Valley live in La La Land.
Hab kein Angst.
Here's a deal, for the hand-wringer who so desparately wants to hear Charlie Dent apologize for making a logical decision.
How about you first thank him and other legislators for 14 years of below national average electricity costs?
How about you get up on your digital soapbox and say -- "Hey, Charlie. That was pretty smart that for 14 years you made it so that the steadily increasing price of energy resources had absolutely no impact on the utility bills I paid."
You can add some schlep in there about your coffee tasting better or your pants having better creases if you're insane like Hillary Kwiatek, but that's optional.
What say you blog-poster? Will you thank as well as cast blame? Stand ye forward and speak good friend.
4:07 PM... you are clearly out of touch. My electric bills just jumped 30% during one of the country's most difficult economic declines and while PPL is posting record profits. Unemployment is around 10%, health care costs continue to climb, the value of homes have dropped and most retiree's lost vast chunks of their retirement fund. Your suggestion is to have me and others thank Dent for this increase? Just how out of touch do you have to be to make that assertion.
If anything, you just made an argument to keep things regulated since regulation is what kept prices in check. The vote 14 years ago to lift regulation is responsible for my costs going up 30%. So thank you Charlie Dent and the other short-sighted fools that neither asked the difficult questions or cared enough to research the actual implications of deregulation. Thank you for my 30% increase in electrical costs. Thank you for being so smart.
The increase is worse than a tax b/c I can't vote somebody out of office for such terrible fiscal irresponsibility. That accountability is gone. The same is about to be true for our state's public pension crisis. We can thank Tom Ridge for his foresight in 2001 for that one.
When newspapers rightly feel a vote Dent made along with everyone else is not particularly newsworthy,
As if the mendoucheous powers that be at our papers are qualified to make that kind of judgement.
The minute they say it isn't worth it, you ABSOLUTELY should be taking it up.
"If anything, you just made an argument to keep things regulated since regulation is what kept prices in check. The vote 14 years ago to lift regulation is responsible for my costs going up 30%."
No, what I am pointing out to you is that for 14 years you paid substantially less for electricity then what market forces would have required you to pay based on what it cost utilities to supply it to you.
There's an economic principle called the time value of money. In other words, for fourteen years you got to spend less, a great deal less, on what you paid for electricity. The money you saved, therefore, could be used by you to increase your purchasing power each of those fourteen years. Maybe you used that money to buy a car? Maybe you put it towards your child's education?
No matter how you spent that money, it was extra money you had in your hand every month for fourteen years.
Let's say the average person saved $35 to $40 per month during that time span. That's between $6,000 and $7,000 in extra money you kept no matter how much a barrel of oil cost PPL or what the cost for natural gas or coal.
I have a modest proposal. If your underwear is bunched up because you saved a couple grand over the last few years -- donate it to charity.
It'll show that you're a good person and it will be a wonderful protest of the deregulation vote that saved you that money.
By the way, the argument you made about keeping rate caps in place was the same argument made by Gov. Gray Davis of California.
How'd that argument work out for him?
Dear Charlie Dent and his cold-hearted friend who is grateful: thank you for casting a vote that jacked up my electric rate 30% in 2010. Your friend, PA Taxpayer.
Dear PA Taxpayer:
I'm with you. Let's do what John Callahan and the Barbara Boxer really want to do . . .
Let's nationalize the utility companies and make them give energy away for free.
Nationalize it! Power to the People for the People!
Nationalize it. Hugo Chavez forever -- Dent never!
I'm a cold-hearted snake -- look into my eyes.
Uh-oh Lehigh Valley Independents been caught telling lies!
My rate jumped from $100 to $130 this month.
I've no choice but to eat my family.
Or maybe turn the computer off when I'm not using it.
If you're all complaining about your 30% increase now, wait until they start taxing carbon to address "climate change".
Make sure you watch how those folks vote now, so you don't have to complain about it 14 years from now.
Holy Shit! 8:17 just hit it out of the goddamn park!
So true. All these super-libs and progressives, like Al Gore, have been bitching for years about how Americans will use less energy if we pay more at the pump and to heat our homes.
Well, now you're paying more, so think of all the good you're doing for the planet.
Hey, PA Taxpayer -- you better be shouting "drill baby drill" with me at the top of your lungs -- or your nothing but a hypocrite.
Bernie,
As I wrote once already, seeing this I am tempted to start a blog called “Allentown Independent Voice”.
Scott Armstrong
The goofs over at Lehigh Valley Independent are using the old Goebbels trick -- if you tell a lie big enough and often enough, everyone will believe it.
They are as independent as your hand is from your arm.
They are in bed with Callahan, Pawlowski and Obama.
I have a simple question because I'm a simple person.
The people who are behind the Lehigh Valley Independent are all far-left liberals/progressives.
Why try to hide that? Is it a tacit admission that what they believe is not acceptable to many people that they are trying to influence?
Why not call themselves the Leftist Lefties in the Lehigh Valley?
At least their honesty could be respected if they did something like that.
Why not call this the Lehigh Valley Mancrush Pedophile Reort.
bernie will twist anything he can as long as it is against callahan.this blog has nothing to do with deregulation or so called independents. it has everything to do with him pandering to dent. rant all you want bernie by this is nothing your weak attempt at a cheap shot at callahan. if you are going to throw things get yourself a stone instead of a pebble. if not you will continue to show your butt and become even a larger laughing stock
"Why not call this the Lehigh Valley Mancrush Pedophile Reort."
Well, you troll here don't you.
What's the matter, are the recess attendants on to your van?
Oh, by the way, Callahan sucks.
I had a weird dream last night.
It involved John Callahan having an original thought on issues of national importance.
Now if only I could remember . . . wavy lines . . . wavy lines . . . wavy lines . . .
Bernie,
Thanks for pointing this out. Isnt it ironic that Callahan is criticizing Dent on this vote now when he has subsequently been such a staunch supporter, both politically and financially, of Democrats who made the exact same vote. So let me get this straight, to Callahan the deregulation vote is only important for Dent but not for Rooney, Boscola, or others? Smells like political opportunism at its worst.
Hey anon 10:11, do you have a "grandson"?
"The only two sources we have for this alleged "press release" are O'Hare (Dent's perk-y hagiographer) and Shawn Millan (Dent's campaign manager). If you want to accuse Kwiatek of plagiarism, please produce the original work. Isn't it at least possible that she could have read the press release, researched the data, found it accurate, and wrote a blog entry reflecting her findings?"
As a matter of fact, I do have a copy of the news release sent out on Tuesday, the day before Kwiatek's blog. Her blog and that news release are virtually identical. Had she independently researched it, as I did, she would have realized that the vote was unanimous in the state house. She fails to note that. She makes it appear that Dent orchestrated this whole thing. Her blog is dishonest. Her failure to disclose that this new release was fed to her is also dishonest. Her failure to reveal a $1,000 contribution from Callahan in a blog promoting him, is dishonest. Other than that, I have no problem with it.
Hey 11:52 it must be hard for you since being featured on "To Catch a Predator."
Happy Valentine's Day.
What about your quid pro quo computer? Did Dent help pay for it?
Sigh. Senator Bernie Sanders is a far left progressive and an INDEPENDENT. Independent does not equal moderate. If Ron Paul didn't hypocritically roll in the pork, he might call himself an independent too.
Take a deep breath and THINK outside the context of MSNBC vs FOX.
"A man may fish with the worm that hath eat of a king, and eat of the fish that hath fed of that worm."
Hamlet, 4. 3
So like Mayor Callahan is the king.
Hillary Kwiatek is the fisherman.
The Callahan press release is the worm.
And the fishy smell comes from her lying about being independent.
Or something, I was never great with English Lit.
Central Scrizutinizer is in the blog-zizzle.
Goin' lay it down proper!
"Sigh. Senator Bernie Sanders is a far left progressive and an INDEPENDENT."
I get that. And guess what? An independent thinking person would not take a bowl of Callahan Chowder, shove it on you and tell you it's independent chowder.
Where have all the big-yappers gone now that someone was smart enough to point out that higher energy rates is what liberals have been saying they want since Earth in the Balance?
O'Hare,
Why not reprint the press release and allow us to judge if Kwiatek's blog entry is "virtual identical" to it? Seems simple enough and it's suspicious that you haven't already done so.
The campaign contribution is a matter of public record; Kwiatek couldn't have hidden it even if she had wanted to. Callahan and she are clearly ideologically similar, and it's laughable to imply that her opposition to Dent is in any way related to the contribution. She supports Callahan because Callahan's political beliefs correspond with her own.
You, on the other hand, have no coherent political ideology. You write laughably laudatory pieces for your benefactors, and launch vicious personal attacks against their political opponents. You abstractly label this "supporting good government," but everyone else recognizes it for what it is: rank cronyism, power for the sake of power. Your financial and personal relationships with those in government who employ you as their mouthpiece are much murkier than Kwiatek's relationship with Callahan and cannot be obtained at any public office. Nor do regularly disclose these illicit relationships in your daily fluff pieces, despite now demanding that Kwiatek do so whenever she chooses to write about anything even tangentially related to John Callahan. As others have remarked here, you are being hypocritical. Unfortunately, that's nothing new for you, is it?
As for the de-regulation vote being unanimous, any astute reader of your coverage of Dent would come away with the impression that the man dwarfs the likes of Washington and Lincoln in his statesmanship and leadership. And yet, when he had the chance to lead and stand against bad legislation, he failed to take the initiative, opting instead to embrace the herd mentality and is now attempting to justify his mistake by claiming he was just one of the flock. Is that how a leader behaves? Just what has Charlie Dent accomplished in his nearly twenty years in elected office that deserves your effusive and unblinking praise, O'Hare?
We're all eyes and ears.
Below is a copy of Callahan's news release, shopped Tuesday and posted by Kwiatek on Wednesday w/o attribution:
"Charlie Dent’s Votes Results in 30% Electric Bill Hike
With Families Already Struggling, Dent Owes the Lehigh Valley an Explanation for supporting the “time bomb” in Lehigh Valley electric bills Lehigh Valley ratepayers can thank Congressman Charlie Dent for the 30%1 hike in electric rates they’re seeing on their bills this month. In Harrisburg, Charlie Dent voted to deregulate Pennsylvania electric companies leading to the 30% rate hike and twice voted against safeguards in the deregulation to ensure a rate decrease for consumers.
“Struggling Lehigh Valley households are getting a 30% utility rate hike this month thanks to Charlie Dent,” said Justin Schall, campaign manager for John Callahan. “This is another example of Charlie Dent supporting big business interests over people in the Lehigh Valley and it speaks volumes about his misplaced priorities.”
During the worse economy since the 1930s Dent’s votes in Harrisburg have resulted in ratepayers getting overwhelming electric bills while electric companies are making huge profits and paying their CEOs over $115 million dollars a year.
“Dent’s votes left families and small businesses with bigger utility bills while electric companies are handing out millions
in bonuses to their CEOs and that’s just not fair,” said Schall.
“Dent sided with special interests and turned his back on the folks he was elected to represent,” said Callahan’s campaign manager. “The Congressman owes the Lehigh Valley an explanation as to why, in the dark of night, he voted to deregulate electric companies in Pennsylvania and allow them to increase their rates 30%.”
BACKGROUND:
In the Pennsylvania legislature Dent voted to increase electric rates rather than protect consumers:
In the middle of the night Dent voted for utility deregulation (HB1509) and against two amendments that would have
ensured that deregulation would result in lower rates for everyday Pennsylvanians rather than huge profits for utility companies.
• Dent voted for HB 15092 (deregulation of utilities). Session was gaveled closed at 4:28 a.m.3
• Dent voted against A8264 to HB 15094 (a 3% decrease per phase-in-period of deregulation – there were three phase in periods suggested therefore this would have resulted in a 9% decrease in rates).
• Dent voted against A8221 to HB 15095 (8.32% decrease in rates by the time deregulation was completed).
PO Box 1386, Bethlehem, PA 18016
Office (610) 625-3880 www.CallahanforCongress.com Fax (484) 397-0151
Paid for by John Callahan for Congress
Page 2
HB 1509 essentially gave large electric utility companies a monopoly over the energy market for 14 years. The result is that in 2008 alone PP&L, Allegheny Energy, and Exelon (PECO) combined to make $30 billion in revenue6, $10 billion7 in profit and their three CEO’s were paid over $115 million in compensation8 including over $3 million in bonuses9. And that was before a 30% rate hike.
The non-partisan Keystone Research Center conducted a report in 2001 showing that consumers and electric utility employees have not fared nearly as well (study was for years 1994 to 1999). 10
• Overall during these six years, Pennsylvania’s electric utilities invested only 7.7% of their $13 billion profits back into their Pennsylvania operations.11
• More than 3,000 electric utility employees lost their jobs between 1994 and 1999 – more than one out of every ten electric utility employees in the Commonwealth.12
• Consumer complaints to the Pennsylvania Utility Commission about electric utilities more than doubled during this time period from under 2,000 to more than 4,000.13"
The Hypocrisy of Ohare is so obvious to everyone but Ohare and his little band of cronies.
It is his blog and he can use it to be the Minister of propaganda for Dent, Angle, Stoffa and whomever he wishes. The problem is he cloaks his partisanship in the "Truth and Transparency" blog bullshit. If anyone dare question his point of view or one of his idols he attacks viciously and personally. Yet he deletes any other posts because he is a hypocrite.
Don't invite people to come and talk if you are going to viciously attack them because they don't read from your script.
Maybe you should think about why you screwed up your life and if you ever learned a thing form it.
It appears to me that she "weave[d] snippets into an original story," something you also admit to doing. The parts that were cribbed from the press release were of a substantive nature, facts that are public record and have not been disputed by anyone, including you, O'Hare. Unless the Callahan camp wants to sue Kwiatek for republishing their work without attribution, it's a non-issue. Your continued attempts to reframe Dent's vote and attack the messenger (I thought ad hominems were a no-no here!) show that even you cannot justify Dent's vote.
Why keep attacking when you know Charlie was wrong this time?
Bernie,
I am also interested in knowing if Dent thinks that people should be lucky to have their electric rates jump 30% in 2010 like some of your posters do.
This impacts real people who don't care about liberals, conservatives or the politics that divides our country. All they care about is keeping their home, raising their kids and keeping them fed and warm so that they can get the best education possible and become oustanding citizens of this land. I can tell you that most of them don't care who wrote the story, who is more "independant" than the other person or that it took 14 years to happen. They want to know why they have to pay 30% more for their electricity in 2010 than in 2009 and they want to know if their politicians are going to do anything to prevent it from happening again while the economy is so terrible and the electric company is making record profits.
I am one of those people. I have voted for Dent in the past and I think I have a right to have my question answered. I don't find myself to be "lucky" and might even vote for the guy again if he would denounce the greedy people who think I am so lucky.
Conservatives may not complain about higher rates as a result of deregulation. They may defend the free market and explain the huge increase by citing an artificial dampening of rates due to years of regulation.
Liberals have no leg to stand on. They must salute the wake up call of higher rates for profligate energy use. They must also acknowledge that the stated plan of their current standard bearer is to significantly increase energy rates in an effort to encourage long-term alternatives and savings.
You see, there is no political problem here. We've gotten what everybody wanted. And we're going to get more. And then PPL runs power lines through the Water Gap and spends kajillions on naming rights to sports stadiums. It's great when a plan comes together.
"Why keep attacking when you know Charlie was wrong this time?"
As I've explained a few times now, the topic of this post is actually Kwiatek's failure to dosclose that she was spinning for callahan. Instead of eing honest and just telling us she had a news release, se made it sound that she was outraged about her bill going up and went out and did all kindas of research and learned it was all Charlie's fault. Her post is a lie.
So, Charlie was wrong and what Kwiatek said about him is completely true, but you're deciding to attack the messenger anyway. Gotcha.
Earth to Democratic Partisans
It is now clear that no matter what you write here or anywhere else, no matter what you unearth about Dent or any other Republican candidates it isn’t going to affect the outcome of this year’s election. As a Republican, “been there done that.” Now the shoe is on the other foot.
Scott Armstrong
"So, Charlie was wrong and what Kwiatek said about him is completely true,"
No. Actually, Kwiatek misled readers by telling them about Dent, but not bothering to point out that the vote was unanimous.
TJ Rooney, who chairs the state Dem party, supported this. Is she going to ask hm to step down>
She creates the false impression that Dent was somehow behind this, pulling the strings. She spins a Callahan news release without telling her readers that she is carrying his water. In a blog intended to benefit Callahan, she never tells her readers that she took $1,000 from him a few months earlier.
As far as the Pennsylvania General Assembly is concerned, I can safely say in 2010 that it was wrong in 1996. To those who are deriding deriding Dent now for what nearly everyone thought in 1996, I have one question: where the well were you in 1996?
The one person I know who actually protested this in 1996 and who thought it was a mistake was Dr. Bob Romancheck, who actually worked for PPL at the time. And incidentally, he is a Dent supporter.
It doesn't matter where I was or how anyone else voted. Charlie was the State Rep then, he made the vote, and he is responsible for it. If he were half the leader you claim he is, he would have voted differently and persuaded others to follow his course. Instead, he went with the flow and every Pennsylvanian is now paying the cost.
I ask you again: just has Dent accomplished in his nearly 20 years in government? Where has he led us?
If you're going to demand that Kwiatek, a liberal Democrat, disclose a campaign contribution that anyone can look up on the Lehigh County website each and every time she writes about Callahan, another liberal Democrat, you should fully disclose your relationship with Dent, Stoffa, and Angle each and every time you write about them. Placing conditions on others that you refuse to abide by yourself is not ethical behavior, O'Hare. Given the number of perks and personal gifts you've received from these people, none of which are officially documented, why should we believe that any of your coverage of them is credible?
Kwiatek distributed something as her original work supposedly triggered by the shock of finding her energy bill went up by $20 bucks.
Based off her post she wants her readers to believe that because of this revelation she researched PA electric deregulation, accessed the internet for state house voting records from 14 years ago, accessed the House journals and FEC websites to garner contribution information.
All of that is plausible.
But what actually happened is John Callahan sent her a press release and she posted it without telling her readers that the information was John Callahan's campaign.
I am glad that someone like her lost her race for public office. She seems untruthful to say the least.
1) When Kiatek spins a Callahan news release, she has an obligation to note what she is doing if she expects to retain a shred of credibility. When she acts as though she was motivated to research something as a result of her most recent electric bill, she is being deceptive.
2) Kwiatek, in her cut and paste job w/ a Callahan news release, also has an obligation to note he helped fund her own campaign. She can't have it both ways. If she wants to blog, then she probably should not be accepting campaign contributions bc they taint her. Having accepted them, she has an obligation to note them when she is slamming the opponent of someone who funded her.
3) As a Congressman, state rep and state senator, Dent has been a faithful stewart to the public. He has led us towards more tansparency, more accountability, and an attempt at bipartisan leadership. I will be expounding on that theme in future posts, and won't need Charlie Dent news releases to help me.
4) Had I been accepting all kinds of perks from anyone I write about, I would have to note it. Not doing so would be unethical, as it is for Kwiatek. But the notion that I am paid for what I write, or that I accept perks or privileges, is simply untrue.
It is true that Angle did chip in with many others to buy me a laptop for my birthday in June. Most of my friends have no interest in politcs and don't even read my blog, if they read at all. They mostly use the internet to hunt for porn. Being a blogger does not mean that I can no longer accept a b-day present from my friends.
1.) If the information she posted was factually accurate, her personal credibility isn't at issue. Everything that she wrote about Dent can be confirmed through public records. You're simply attacking the original source because you disagree with the message but cannot refute its contents, the epitome of an ad hominem smear.
2.) The campaign contribution was made before Kwiatek began blogging, was used for campaign purposes, and certainly didn't help Kwaitek win election. She has no financial relationship with Callahan now, nor does she have any reason to think that he will give her additional contributions in the future. She's a liberal Democrat, Callahan's a liberal Democrat, Dent's her Republican Congressman who she wants to see defeated because she disagrees with him politically. Really, Bernie, do you think she'd be writing pro-Dent puff pieces had Callahan not given her a contribution?
3.) You're telling us nothing, which indicates that he's accomplished nothing. Being a "nice guy" isn't the same thing as being an effective legislator.
4.) There's no way for us to know the extent of your financial relationships with Dent, Stoffa, and Angle. If there was some sort of ideological connection, your unflinching support might make sense, but none of you seem to believe in much of anything beyond cronyism and staying in power. Your inability to name a single legislative accomplishment of Dent is particularly troubling.
As for the computer gift, it would be proper to disclose it each and every time you write anything about Angle or one of his opponents. To save time, you could post a permanent disclaimer on your sidebar. By the rules you've placed on Kwiatek, your failure to do so would be unethical and hypocritical.
Let us not forget the fact that Mr. Stoffa has ordered folks to give Bernie use of all County facilities over and above what is allowed for just the public. Please be accurrate Mr. Ohare.
I love it when Bernie O'Hare shuts up his critics. He does it with a certain panache.
"We demand that you show us the press release!" So shout the critic.
"There is no press release! You lie!" Says another critic.
Abracadabra -- post press release. Cue sound of crickets from critics.
Lest we forget, the genesis of Ms. K's umbrage was an increase of $20 in her electric bill.
That is $20 per month!
Good heavens, she may have to sell the farm.
In the meantime, the focus is shifted to ONE vote of Mr. Dent's while ignoring that Mr. Callahan has not taken a position on anything at any time.
This is politics at its most clever.
$20 bucks per month!
Jesus Christ!
How's Hillary going to be able to afford her Rachel Maddox 'do from Super Cuts, now!
Ah! the typical Republican anti-lesbian message of the day.
At least her contribution is out in the public. We know that Ohare was given a computer by someone who is well known as an anti-smite and racist, Ron Angle and who is the most vile and corrupt politician in the Lehigh Valley. We are less clear on the special arrangements that have been made for Mr. Ohare by John Stoffa in Northampton County. We also know that just like Abe Atiyeh you will never find Ohare's name on a Stoffa campaign report.
I guess transparency is a little more or less opaque depending on who you are looking at.
"Ah! the typical Republican anti-lesbian message of the day."
Really -- is that what that was? Not because they have similar hair styles?
Can't we reach a place where those on the Left look beyond sexual politics and see just people?
Clearly those of you critical of Callahan not taking any strong positions yet have no real understanding of how politics is played and how it works.
1. He is Mayor of a small city and has not had to deal with Middle East Politics or Abortion or DODT or DOMA or HCR or anything else a congressman has to deal with. So yes he has no great public record on these issues but he has not had to.
2. He is playing this really smart. Dent is trying to draw him into a debate now some 10 months before the election. Dent is trying to define him early. Callahan is a blank slate on all these big issues and in his own time on his own schedule he will define himself he is too smart to allow Charlie to define him this early.
Bernie I know for a fact you know this to be true
3.Only nerds like us are paying attention to this election this early.
As far as Hillary - She is bright, strong and talented young woman with a great head on her shoulders and she will be a player in the Democratic Party for years to come. She may never run for office again but her influence will continue to grow and it will show. She has a great deal to offer and I look forward to watching her over the next few years. And, I suspect she would be supporting Callahan regardless of his not all that big contribution to her last year.
Really Bernie you have been around long enough. Do you really think that amount of money can buy a lifetime of loyality?
Donal, This is one of those instances where you and I are going to have to agree to disagree.
1) You note Callahan "has not had to deal with Middle East Politics or Abortion or DODT or DOMA or HCR or anything else a congressman has to deal with."
Then why is he running? By your own admission, he is not driven by the issues.
2) "He is playing this really smart." Once again, we disagree. He has allowed hiomself to be painted as a person who has no spine and who is scared to take positions bc that might cost him votes. He looks like all show and no substance.
3) "Only nerds like us are paying attention to this election this early" Some of those nerds are in the media, and the image Callahan has created will stick with them in their coverage througout the campaign.
4) "Do you really think that amount of money can buy a lifetime of loyality?" Of course not, but that's her own reasoning. PPL's contributions to Dent amount to 1.1% of his total, and she's suggesting that bought a lifetime of loyalty. Her contribution from Callahan was 2.5% of her total. By her own reasoning, she has been bought.
As far as her political lifespan is concerned, I think it's over now. After her nasty race against Eckhart, she not only refused to concede, but actually insisted he apologize to her. She made baseless accusations of anti-Semitism. Now, she is being dishonest with her readers. Aperson like her is the last thing we need in government.
Hillary Kwiatek is a Sam Bennett waiting to be born.
Please, God -- let her become a major player in Democrat politics.
On Saturday nights, the trolls come out in force. So comment moderation is being enabled. I remind you that I welcome your thoughts and love to argue. Feel free to disagree. But remember, commenting is a privilege, not a right. I will delete personal attacks or off-topic remarks.
No you don't!
Bernie
This is still very early in a race with no Primary. I mean we still have incumbents still deciding whether to run or not.
He has a lot of time and a lot of money to define himself.
Charlie Dent is driven by issues? Really. He is driven by whatever the leadership tells him. Did you read his post Gitmo visit comments? Please he has become the hack he campaigned against as a young man. He is not the moderate Charlie Dent he was in Harrisburg. His response to all issues sound like they have been written by John Boehner's staff.
Charlie was a leader on AIDS and Hate Crime issues in Harrisburg and now he votes to amend the constitution to define marriage. That issue alone is a deal breaker for me. (The same reason I will not vote for Boscola again).
Since this is all bullshit anyway and all politics is corrupt I would rather have a blank slate who in the pocket of the left than someone who appears to have sold his soul to right wing extremists that threaten the core of our republic.
As for Hillary I think you have her all wrong. I have gotten to know her and I really think you're off on this. I gave her $50 before I knew her well now I would have given much more and come out of exile to support her.
I am off your comment sections for awhile - I really can't take the hate. Passion is one thing but all the hate here is not healthy for me. I will always log in to read you but the comments are too much. Thanks for a great site
"Callahan and she are clearly ideologically similar"
Really? Did Callahan tell you that? The reality is that he is am ex-Republican who switched parties so it would be easier to get elected in Bethlehem. I have no idea whay his ideology may be, but suspect it is himself.
Gotta love liberal logic (and the obsession with sexuality)
Well Ohare you continue to allow the smears you agree with but delete comments that show your logic is flawed.
You are comparing apples to oranges and at least two posts you have deleted made that point.
I guess we should have just made sarcastic anti-lesbian remarks and you would find that helpful.
Hypocrite!
1:16 -
Remember, Progressive Liberals laugh their heads off when "Tea Baggers" are continuously smeared as homosexuals...
Hey Anon 1:30, you folks called yourself "teabaggers" and you have said it with pride and conviction, good for you. Your bigoted veiled "lesbian" insults regarding Rachel Maddox and Hillary are so obvious it is sad to think God wasted a brain on you. Then again....
Oh and anon 1:15, all the great progressive responses have been deleted by your buddy Igor Ohare, so only your bigotry remains.
Post a Comment