chamblissbush.jpgSaxby Chambliss, Republican Senator from Georgia, and purveyor (along with Rove) of one of the most vile campaign strategies in recent history, just said the following during the Von Spakovsky hearing: That the people who oppose Von Spakovsky are “extremely partisan individuals.” (And why does this sound vaguely like a poorly delivered Pee Wee Herman imitation — “I know you are. But what am I?”)

Well, if “extremely partisan” means people who oppose cheaters, frauds, and liars, then count me among those folks. If it means people who think voting rights are too important to be repeatedly gamed and disrespected, then count me in there, too.

Here’s a question for Sen. Chambliss: Why aren’t you standing up for a legitimate, non-partisan, fully legal vote for every American? Voting is important — why don’t you think so, Sen. Chambliss? Why aren’t you fighting for every valid ballot to be counted, for every American to get to the polls to cast their ballot, and for as open, honest and integrity-filled process for elections as we could possibly have? What’s to hide, sir?

Here’s a question for the entire Rules Committee in the Senate: why on earth would you pass through the entire slate of nominees to the full Senate without comment when one of those nominees is an odious, hyper-partisan shill who hid behind a pseudonym to write a law review article revealing himself to be such — at a time when doing so was against DOJ and FEC regs? What part of walking the wrong side of the rules and regs do you think is appropriate for a job which entails enforcement of the same? (In case you missed the entirely convoluted and whiny-by-design hearing, you can listen to it in its entirety thanks to selise. Huge thanks!)

I got this in my e-mail from Sen. Schumer’s office a few minutes ago:

“Hans van Spakovsky was one of the primary architects of the Justice Department’s strategy of pushing bogus voter fraud prosecutions to stifle voter participation. Mr. von Spakovsky has made it his business to deny individuals the right to vote, and because of that, he should not sit on the Federal Election Commission. I will vote against Mr. von Spakovsky’s nomination when it comes to the floor.”

That’s nice and all, and a good start at a clear, concise statement of what is wrong with von Spakovsky — but he’s headed to the floor of the Senate for a vote when he should have been stopped in committee. Let me be very clear here: Schumer is correct, von Spakovsky has no business on the FEC with his record — I expect to see work, not just words, to see that he is defeated.

Backroom dealing your way through life doesn’t get you anywhere but in the same damn gutter as everyone else. Right about now, I could use some leadership…too bad I can’t find any in Washington, D.C. today.

Why yes, I am pissed. If you are, too, feel free to give these folks a call:

Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) (202) 224-3841
Charles E. Schumer (D-NY) (202) 224-6542
Harry Reid (D-NV) (202) 224-3542

Toll-free numbers to the switchboard (via katymine):

1 (800) 828 – 0498
1 (800) 459 – 1887
1 (800) 614 – 2803
1 (866) 340 – 9281
1 (866) 338 – 1015
1 (877) 851 – 6437

(Photo by AP via BBC.)

Related posts:

  1. Von Spakovsky Accuses Obama Civil Rights Team of “Nakedly Political” Acts; NYT Fails to Note HvS’s Own Partisan Work
  2. The Torturer Times: The Washington Post’s Partisan Press Release Service
  3. Hey John Nichols: Pointing Out That Fox News is Partisan Isn’t “Whining”
  4. Tehran Protests: Her Name Was Neda (Warning: Extremely Graphic Video)
  5. SCOTUS: Is NRA Already Backtracking on Sotomayor Opposition?