Wagging The Dog With Ensign and Rangle?

Share |

Senate employees are normally prohibited from testifying outside of Congress. So why has the Senate this week approved a resolution allowing Ensign staffers to speak to the grand jury?

.

A more important question, I suppose, is how this story has attracted so little attention compared to the questionable ethics troubles of Democratic Sen. Charles Rangle?

From my perspective, Sen. Ensign has found himself between a rock and a hard place. If not for Sen. Rangle or any wounded democrat consuming so much of the daily news cycle, republicans would be screaming over the "resolution" and circling the wagons around Ensign whom, by the way, is in far more dire straits than his democratic colleague.

To the displeasure of contributors is the fact that Ensign's campaign is paying for legal bills incurred by several staffers speaking to the Senate ethics committee. Ensign has already admitted to having an affair with former campaign staffer, Cynthia Hampton, who is the wife of former Ensign Senate staffer Doug Hampton.

.

Soon after both Hampton's were forced out of the inner circle, Ensign's parents ambiguously presented the ousted couple with a check for $96,000. In addition to the 96K, Doug Hampton was awarded a lobbying job with Ensign's help prior to the one-year ban prohibiting such transitions from the public to private sectors. Here lies the Crux of what the DOJ and the ethics panel are investigating and whether Ensign broke Senate lobbying laws.

Tonight on The Rachel Maddow Show, guest host Chris Hayes reported that Ensign staffers have already testified that conversation about the ban took place within Ensign's office prior to Hampton assuming the lobbying post.

If republicans were hoping to ride the Charlie Rangle scandal into the mid-term elections, they may want to start formulating a PLAN B as soon as possible. This Ensign debacle seems as if it's being choreographed to unfold in unison with the Rangle situation.

I'm not trying to assert that any wagging of the dog is taking place on either side of the aisle. I'm just considering something that my grandfather frequently said about something that walks like a duck and quacks like a duck.....You know the rest.

Chico Brisbane

CODE BLUE at C St: Religious Right On Damage Control

Share |

CODE BLUE at 133 C St. SE: The Religious Right is on damage control over the shinanigans that have come to light at the secrative brick building on C Street. The fact that three out of six congressman that lived there were caught up in sex scandals speaks volumes. We now know that in the case of the 3 married congressmen, their affairs where known by other members of the C St. Fellowship.

It seems disingenuous that anyone would try to defend the C Street Fellowship at this point in the game. Perhaps they forgot that we reap what we sew and in the future, instead of assisting in the coverup of these sexual affairs, they’ll tell the offending member this type of behavior is unacceptable and suggest they move out immedaitely.

A post on POLITICO today said that the large townhouse is valued at more than $1.8 million, and that it’s run by Christian network of nonprofits and ministries known as “The Fellowship.” Headquartered in Arlington, Va., the group focuses on what Fellowship leaders call the “up and out,” or powerful politicians struggling to confront their personal demons. I guess it is safe to assume from this point forward that congressmen both Republican and Democrat connected to the C Street Rehab are in the process of confronting their personal demons.

By ministering to the most powerful, The Fellowship believes, it can bring Christian beliefs to the larger culture. Jeff Sharlet, who wrote a book about his time in The Fellowship's Virginia headquarters, said the group believes that lawmakers have been "chosen" to lead by Jesus Christ.

In February, Nevada Sen. John Ensign — who lives at the house — was confronted at C Street by colleagues who wanted him to end his affair with a staffer.

Earlier this month, South Carolina Gov. Mark Sanford — who lived at C Street when he served in the House — said C Street was where he’d been asked the “hard questions” that were “very, very important” in his decision to admit an affair with an Argentine woman.

And last week, the estranged wife of former Rep. Chip Pickering said he carried on a long-term extramarital affair while living at the “well-known C Street Complex.”

But Christian lawmakers say Washington prayer and Bible-study groups — and the secrecy that surrounds them — provide crucial counseling for their lives in the nation’s capital.

“One thing about having members meet with members is they kind of understand what each other goes through and the stresses and the pressures and those kinds of things,”

Congressional Prayer Caucus Chairman Rep. Randy Forbes (R-Va.), who participates in a small Bible study group on Wednesday mornings. “And one member can tell another member, ‘I don’t think that’s the right thing for you to do.’”

In an interview with the evangelical World Magazine, Sen. Jim DeMint (R-S.C.) described living at C Street as “one of the best parts” of life in Washington.

“We kind of make that commitment to each other to get together once a week,” he said.

“Sometimes it’s a Bible study; we always have a spiritual or scriptural thought. But sometimes we just talk about each others’ lives, try to get to know each other, remind each other that we are not important, that it’s just a title.”

Although titles may not be important, there are plenty of them at C Street. In addition to DeMint and Ensign, C Street residents include Sen. Tom Coburn (R-Okla.) and Reps. Mike Doyle (D-Pa.), Bart Stupak (D-Mich.) and Zach Wamp (R-Tenn.). Sen. Sam Brownback (R-Kan.) lived in the house before moving to his own condo, and he still attends events there. Former Reps. Steve Largent (R-Okla.), Jim Ryun (R-Kan.), and Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) have also studied at C Street.

John Ensign And His Religious Path To Politics

Share |

When religious men suddenly fall from grace and particularly politicians, it's not unresionable to assume that their overly publicized connection with the Lord is nothing more than a manufactured persona or a storyline if you will. It's their way of insuring that only one storyline remains in the minds of Americans and particularly those that are constituants who weild the power of the all mighty vote.

In the case of Republican Senator John Ensign of Nevada, his connections and affiliations with everything religious and holy have left a trail of bred crumbs that are casting a far more sinister light on the political path of rightousness that he took on the way to Washington. There are more men who do not violate their marriage vows then there are that do. And among those who stay true to those vows are men who are not particularly religious. In fact, some haven't stepped foot in a church since their own wedding day.

Yet Ensign on the other hand, chose to publicly involve himself with Promise Keepers, a religious mens group that is based on seven promises. A closer look at the religious group gives it the appearance more like a "self help" group based on it's 7 principles like Alcoholics Annonymous is based on it's 12 steps. It is a way for those who have strayed onto a path of dangerous and unhealthy behavior to find their way back with the help of those suffering from the same afflictions. One of the most striking things about Promise Keepers besides their 7 promises is the chronological order of importance in which they have been placed.

Promise #1 Of course is to honor Jesus Christ. But it's Promise #2 that's amazing not just for the basic premise of the promise itself, but rather because it's the second promise in order of importance only to Jesus and well ahead of the promise to fedility in ones own marriage. Promise #2 says and I quote "A Promise Keeper is committed to pursuing vital relationships with a few other men, understanding that he needs brothers to help him keep his promises."

If you are so weak in spirit that you need to surround yourself with a support system to keep you from screwing around on your wife, then it's obvious that you have already done it and are trying not to do it again, or that you are doing it right now and are trying to stop. With the lid being blown off of what goes on a 133 C Street SE in Washington D.C. and that Sen. John Ensign himself is a resident and a member of "the family" speaks volumes.

This is the epicenter of where the conspiracy was hatched to pay-off Senator Ensign's mistress and that in fact, a $96,000 dollar payment was made. According to Doug Hampton who is the husband of Ensign's mistress, Sen. Tom Coburn (R) of Oklahoma, who also has a connection with "the family" and the "C Street" residence attempted to negotiate a pay-off to the Hampton's before Mr. Hampton went public by sending a letter to Megyn Kelly of The Fox News Channel. Shortly after Hampton sent the letter to The Fox News Channel, Ensign suddenly and unexpectedly went public with the affair.

John Ensign, Nevada Senator, copped to having an affair with Cynthia Hampton, who was for a time on his campaign staff. The television media got all worked up about it, saying things like, "This is bad news for Ensign, one of the GOP's presidential contenders." And people like me replied, "Wait! John Ensign is a presidential contender?" later adding, "Seriously, you can't possibly think this guy was ever going to be a presidential contender." And Ensign was thought to be working out all his difficulties with some group called the "C Street Foundation," which describes itself as a "Bible study group" but is actually some sort of detox facility for Congresspersons who are way into sexcapades. To assert that the $96,000 was a gift is an insult to reasonable people, but it has not detered Ensign or his consiglari from making the assertion anyway. Nor will it stop them from pulling out the bible and reminding those who they've drawn in with their religious perception that forgivness is not just a word, it's an obligation. It's what makes Jesus smile.

Ensign claims the affair continued into August 2008, months after Hampton claims it had broken up. Ensign, Hampton claims, then paid "more than $25,000" to Cynthia as "severance" out of his own pocket — an amount now known to be $96,000 paid by Ensign's casino-owning parents to four members of the Hampton family.

He also maintains that Ensign personally paid Cynthia's insurance to compensate for Doug's loss of government benefits — all while continuing to pursue a sexual affair with Cindy Hampton.
Ensign has disputed Hampton's account and has accused him of a million-dollar shakedown effort.

Some excerpts:

— "[Ensign] orchestrated the creation of November Inc. and me getting [out] of the state and getting out of his official office. He told me, basically, at the same time he said, 'I'm in love with your wife' — 'You can't work with me anymore.'"

— "He made you feel incredibly guilty if you weren't part of making this go down the way he wanted it to."

— "I hope that the [Senate] Ethics [Committee] does a tremendous investigation. ... I would hope that the government would do some things as an employer."

The payments, made in $12,000 increments, were "consistent with a pattern of generosity" by Ensign's parents, the statement said. Ensign's father, Michael, is a former casino executive who helped bankroll his son's political rise. The admission came after Doug Hampton gave a television interview to Jon Ralston, a commentator and Las Vegas television host, in which he painted Ensign as an unrepentant wife-chaser who tried to buy his mistress' silence.

Once the story about the payment hit the media, Ensign's camp disclosed that Ensign's parents had actually paid out $96,000 to the Hamptons. But not because anyone wanted this affair kept a secret! No, no! Ensign's parents "decided to make the gifts out of concern for the well-being of long-time family friends during a difficult time," and these monies were "consistent with a pattern of generosity by the Ensign family to the Hamptons and others." So, TOTALLY NOT some kind of end-run around ethics requirements at all! What grown up senator wouldn't want his mom and dad giving large sums of monies to random friends, anyway?

Mark Sanford's news conference today was unusual for lot of reasons, but here's a less obvious one: The South Carolina governor referred to "C Street," a Washington dormitory for lawmakers funded by a highly secretive Christian organization called the Fellowship. (The Fellowship is the group behind the National Prayer Breakfast, where President Obama rolled out his Office of Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships earlier this year.) It's rare for elected officials to publicly allude to C Street or to anything affiliated with the Fellowship. But here's the exchange between Sanford and a reporter:

QUESTION: Did your wife and your family know about the affair before the trip to Argentina?

SANFORD: Yes. We've been working through this thing for about the last five months. I've been to a lot of different—as part of what we called "C Street" when I was in Washington. It was, believe it or not, a Christian Bible study—some folks that asked members of Congress hard questions that I think were very, very important. And I've been working with them. I see Cubby Culbertson in the back of the room. I would consider him a spiritual giant. The Associated Press wrote about the Fellowship in 2003. Interesting to note that Sen. John Ensign, who admitted to an extramarital affair, is also closely affiliated with the group and is a resident of C Street:

Six members of Congress live in a $1.1 million Capitol Hill town house that is subsidized by a secretive religious organization, tax records show. The lawmakers, all Christians, pay low rent to live in the stately red brick, three-story house on C Street, two blocks from the Capitol. It is maintained by a group alternately known as the "Fellowship" and the "Foundation" and brings together world leaders and elected officials through religion.

The six lawmakers—Reps. Zach Wamp, R-Tenn.; Bart Stupak, D-Mich.; Jim DeMint, R-S.C.; Mike Doyle, D-Pa.; and Sens. John Ensign, R-Nev. and Sam Brownback, R-Kan.—live in private rooms upstairs. Rent is $600 a month, DeMint said.

"Our goal is singular—and that is to hope that we can assist them in better understandings of the teachings of Christ, and applying it to their jobs," said Richard Carver, a member of the Fellowship's board of directors who served as an assistant secretary of the Air Force during the Reagan administration.

The house, valued at $1.1 million, is owned by the C Street Center, a sister organization of the Fellowship. It received more than $145,000 in Fellowship grants between 1997 and 2000, according to IRS records—including $96,400 in 1998 for reducing debt.Its tenants dine together once a week to discuss religion in their daily lives.

"We do have a Bible study," said DeMint, a Presbyterian who asked to move into the house less than a year ago when there was a vacancy. "Somebody'll share a verse or a thought, but mostly it's more of an accountability group to talk about things that are going on in our lives, and how we're dealing with them."

Hopefully those in the future desirous of a career in politics will see that there is no religious path. It's a slippery slope at best.

Fox News' Megyn Kelly's Story Not Adding Up

Share |

In the many years that I have been sending greeting cards for all ocassions to friends and family via the United States Postal Service, I am pleased to announce that they have never lost or misdirected a single one. Therefore, I'm having a bit of a problem beleiving The Fox News Channels cliam that they "never" received the letter dated June 15 from Doug Hampton, the husband of Senator John Ensign's mistress.

Tom Lowell, senior producer of "America's Newsroom," hosted by Megyn Kelly and Bill Hemmer, said no one at Fox News ever received a printed letter. Yet in the same breath, Lowell says that a booker on the show received an email from Doug Hampton with the letter in question attached on June 15 — the day before the Senator Ensign's press conference.

"We never received any letter from Mr. Hampton," Lowell told the Huffington Post. "He might have sent it, but we never received it. He did reach out to us about 24 hours before the news conference, and he sent an e-mail to a booker on my staff." Lowell said that a member of his editorial staff followed up with Hampton on the 15th when they received the email with the letter that they never recieved included as an attachment.

According to Lowell, he said that they followed up with Hampton, but that he seemed evasive and not credible. "We didn't pursue it," he said. "We certainly weren't going to rush to air with accusations against a sitting Senator without doing due diligence on the reputability of the claims." - Okay....that sounds good, but we are talking about the network that went to air with Obama is a muslum, potentially not a U.S. citizen, attended a madrassa as a child, palled around with unrepentant terrorist. The same Obama whom at the time was not only a sitting Senator, but a presidential candidate to boot. I found Mr. Lowell's next statement even more laughable then the last.

"I know there are people asking if we alerted the senator," Lowell said. "Definitely no one on our editorial team called anyone in Senator Ensign's office prior to our announcement. We just hadn't gotten to that point of confirming the story yet. Somehow, somebody told the Senator something and I don't know how that happened.

Well...jeepers-creepers, that is a fucking mystery, isn't it? - Good thing he's already ruled out anyone on the editorial team. That narrows it down from a couple of hundered possibilities to just shy of a couple hundred possibilities and I think that Lowell detected the rediculousness of his comment as soon as it spewed forth because he followed that up with an emphatic denial that he could not possibly be substantiate.

Lowell stated emphatically that no one at Fox News reached out to the Senator to alert him and my follow up question(s) would be: How can you be sure? and Would you bet your life on it?
Fox News is denying reports the network received a letter from Doug Hampton, whose wife had an affair with Sen. John Ensign, sent five days before Ensign's news conference, detailing the entirety of the affair. Yet they admit that they recieved an emial on June 15 - 24 hours before Senator Ensign went public with the affair.

"I categorically deny that we ever reached out to the senator in any way shape or form prior to him making his announcement," said Lowell. Apparently Mr. Lowell made this statement unaware of the fact that Senator Ensign's spokesman

said the senator disclosed his affair with Hampton’s wife, Cynthia, because her husband had approached "a major television news channel before Tuesday," the day Ensign admitted the affair. This all but confirms that Ensign was tipped off by Fox News and the good news is that it wasn't anyone on the editorial staff.

Why didn’t Fox ever reveal the existence of what should have been newsworthy information they had. Even after Senator Ensign went public with the affair, Fox news kept the letter under wraps until The Vegas Sun got their hands on a copy. Only then did they admit recieving an email with the letter attached.

"We always evaluate people when they call into the newsroom in terms of: does this sound like its solid? Does it sound like its actionable?" Lowell said. "There were some questions here, so we decided that we would make some inquiries but that it wasn't something we needed to move on immediately. And before we could nail everything down and confirm this story the Senator had already announced his press conference."

Lowell denies that anyone at Fox News would have contacted the senator to give him a head's up on Hampton's allegations, but it may not be so simple. Here is a snip from the

Las Vegas Sun – which has done exceptional coverage of this story:

"In a letter dated five days before Sen. John Ensign’s public confession of an extramarital affair, Doug Hampton pleaded to a national Fox News anchorwoman for help in exposing the senator’s "heinous conduct and pursuit" of Hampton’s wife.

Hours before the Sun obtained an unsigned copy of the letter, Ensign’s spokesman said the senator disclosed the affair with Cynthia Hampton because her husband had approached "a major television news channel before Tuesday," the day Ensign admitted the affair. "We learned of this fact before the news conference," the spokesman noted in an e-mail."

Doug Hampton's letter is chilling, raising serious questions of threats and retaliation from Ensign that should have been considered when someone at Fox seems to have tipped Ensign off. It should be noted that Hampton does not specify the nature of his concerns nor provide supporting materials for his allegations. That said, Hampton does write that he wishes to meet with Fox News to furnish them with the information. Ensign went public only five days later, making it unlikely that Hampton had the time to meet with Fox and present them with the particulars.

Once Ensign went public, however, Fox should have immediately revealed that they had been approached, even if only to make it known they had been working this story. This morning's comment from Lowell does not address the issues. Instead, additional questions are raised.
None of Fox’s reporting on this scandal discloses something as important as Hampton’s reaching out to Kelly, at least not from what I have seen. But does that alone support Fox's claims that they never received the letter? No.

Consider that Lowell says that Hampton reached out to Fox 24 hours before Ensign's press conference and that Fox thought "that it wasn't something we needed to move on," and questioned Hampton's credibility. But why did they not revisit Hampton's allegations after the Ensign news conference, in which he admits to the affair with Cynthia Hampton?

Moreover, they have yet to provide Hampton's side of the story, even though they have now confirmed that he reached out to them. Why? If Hampton is indeed not credible, then what is he not credible about? In addition, Fox did reporting as this scandal was breaking and did not mention the letter they claim not to have gotten NOR the email they admit to receiving.

Take for example

this article from Fox News, in which it is reported that Ensign came forward about the affair because of extortion and see if you notice anything of importance missing:
"An influential Republican senator went public Tuesday about an extramarital affair he had with a member of his campaign staff -- a decision that FOX News sources say was prompted by a blackmail threat.

Two Senate Republican sources close to Sen. John Ensign of Nevada told FOX News that a former employee had asked Ensign for money in what both sources described as a case of "extortion."

The employee, Doug Hampton, worked in Ensign's Senate office, and his wife, Cindy Hampton, worked for Ensign's re-election campaign. Both ceased working for the senator shortly after the affair ended, the sources said, with Cindy Hampton receiving a severance package. The circumstances of Doug Hampton's departure remain unclear.

Ensign spokesman Tory Mazzola said the affair took place between December 2007 and August 2008 with a campaign staffer who was married to an employee in Ensign's Senate office, however, it wasn't immediately clear whether the Hamptons were the couple in question. Ensign, 51, said he would not mention the name of the campaign aide involved in the affair. He described the woman and her husband as good friends."

Fox News does not mention that they already knew of the allegations or that they already knew of Hampton’s identity. After all, Hampton did email them - they have confirmed this. Regardless of what happened with the letter, they already knew who Hampton was and what his allegations were. Even if we assume that Fox did not get Hampton's letter, the ethical lapse here is troubling.

They have reported on a story that they had been tipped off to in which at least one major allegation - the affair - was confirmed by all parties, and the person tipping them off is the spouse of the woman having an affair with a Senator. They mention none of this in any of their reporting. So why should we trust them when they say they did not receive the letter?
If we take the allegations at face value, however, then Fox had the letter five days before Ensign came forward, making the extortion claim a bit questionable. In addition, there seems to be no attempt to contact Doug Hampton for comment, even though he has already contacted them. Why?

In another article, Fox News once again makes no mention of the letter, the email - now confirmed - nor seem to be terribly interested in the other side of the story. They do not contact the Hamptons about the extortion claim they are reporting on. Why?

Prior to Fox's denials this morning, the Las Vegas Sun approached Kelly for comment before they published Hampton's letter. Kelly, however, declined to comment which, given her day job, is astounding. She is a journalist and the subject of a story tip could publicly incriminate her or someone on her team of violating something as sacrosanct as source confidentiality. Why would she at least personally confirm if she had gotten the letter or not? Why would she not confirm that she had gotten the email? Why did she not say what Lowell has said?

When you are reading the letter Hampton wrote to Kelly, reprinted below in full, the following questions should be kept in mind. Also keep in mind that we don't know for sure if the letter ever reached her. We do, however, now know that an email reached Lowell 24 hours prior to Ensign's presser:

-Why does Hampton seem to place all of the blame on Ensign for the affair? It seems to me that he is suggesting that the couple were under financial pressure and that Ensign was somehow threatening them. He also appears to be concerned for his safety. Again, although Hampton does not provide evidence to support his allegations, he indicates that he will furnish Fox with additional information when the network and he meet.

-Did Fox actually work the story and contact Ensign for comment in the process, thereby informing him of the story? If so, where is that story and why won’t Kelly say so? If Kelly and team were not working the story, then why not? What did they do with the information?
-How did Ensign find out that Hampton had approached Fox? Or did Ensign not know for sure it was Fox, but somehow know that Hampton had approached a major media outlet? Having received countless letters from various people asking me to look at their stories, I can tell you that the only people who know the tips and leads you are working on are you and your editor (once you inform him or her).

Granted, Kelly has a TV show and it is possible that she first went to Fox lawyers rather than investigate the matter. Still, if that is the case, why not simply explain that she was in the early process of the investigation rather than not comment at all when asked about the letter? Considering that Ensign came forward only five days after the letter was allegedly sent, Kelly's lack of explanation on the matter is especially troubling. Considering too that at the very least, Kelly's team was informed of Hampton's allegations and concerns 24 hours prior to Ensign coming forward, again making Kelly's silence very troubling.

Think about this. Ensign had to organize his approach, speak to his family, lawyers, and the RNC and even get a speech together. Five days is not a great deal of time to do all of this. So assuming Kelly got the letter and then did tip Ensign off and we don't yet know for sure if that is the case - it is likely that it would have happened within the first few days.

Nevertheless, Mr. Hampton must have fallen out of the stupid tree and hit every branch on the way down if he ever thought for one minute that The Fox News Channel was going to assist him in blind-siding a republican Senator with accusations of adultry.

Republican Hipocracy On The Rise

Share |

Senator Ensign should resign and not because he had an aldulterous affair, but rather because of his selfrightous demands for others to resign when they were in the same situation. Of course that's not likely since republicans can rationalize just about anything. In spite of the global economic meltdown brought on by George W. Bush's economic mismanagament in persuit of an unregulated free-market ideology, republicans still attempt to sell American's on self-regulation.

They accuse President Obama of having a September 10th mentality and thereby making the country less safe. I submit that it's the republican's that have a November 2nd mentality and are thereby ignoring the virtual electorial bitch slapping that was handed to John McCain and Sarah Palin on November 3rd by a vast majority of those same American's.

For a complete and utter lack of new ideas, they attempt to rewrap and rename the fundamentals of Reganomics that for the most part, are what have brought us to the edge of the abyss where the nation now finds itself. What conservative evangelicals need to ask themselves is this: If you're worth millions as most politicians are, is there any resession or even a full blown depression that could effect you in the same way as a person on a fixed income or a member of the working middle class? Conservative evangelicals have fallen into the trap of looking to the republican party as a one stop shop for political representation based mostly on their religious beliefs.

While I don't agree completely with some far left leaning idologies of the democratic party, there is a broader picture that I must take into account for the benefit of myself and my family. But at some point, even the religious right will have to decide if they want to continue voting for the hipocracy of people like John Ensign, Mark Foley, David Vitter, Larry Craig, and many others who wrap themselves in their religious beliefs, but then cheating on their wives, chasing after teenage boys on the hill, or solicite gay sex in public restrooms.

What takes this hiprocracy to its pinnacle is when they climb atop of thier ivory tower and demand the resignations of those who were caught before them doing the same thing, yet refuse to resign after being caught temselves.

The republicans talk about healthcare reform, but never offer up anything that remotely sounds like a plan to make healthcare accessable to any Armerican who wants it. While President Obama has said time and time again that universal health care will not replace private health care and that if you have a plan you like, you're free to keep it. Yet the republican fear mongerers in both houses of congress tell anyone who will listen that "socalized medicine" will force everyone to accept government health care.

Does anyone believe that Blue Cross, Blue Shield, HelathNet, Kaiser Permenente, and a hundered other medical insurance providers, PPO's and HMO's are just going to go quietly into the night so that the government can takeover the healthcare industry? - If you have ever found yourself in the doctors office without insurance or God forbid, the emergency room, you know that the cost of primary medical care in the United States is outrageous and there is no justification for it other then to punish the unemployed, uninsured, and retired persons not yet eligible for medicare.

For most people the recession is abundantly clear. People are worried about their jobs, their retirement, their friends and family because we all know someone who has been impacted by the recession. Because of this awareness, people are more cautious with spending which of course has impacted the economy as well. Unless you live in a cave it's difficult to miss the seriousness of the recession. Unless you are a banking executive who was bailed out by those same taxpayers who are concerned about the recession.

Many on the right couldn't care less if the American auto industry collapses, yet many of those Ford, GM, and Crysler employees are responsible for voting these obtuse bastards into office because he she was attracted to their pro-life idology, their stand against same-sex marriage. However, I can assure you that as the layoff slips are passed out around the factory and the forclosure sale of their home looms on the horizon, these issues while still important, don't really resonate as reasons to hand out their vote for political representation.

Suddenly Chuck and Steve from down the street aren't at the top of the list of problems to solve. While many will not agree with my perception of things as I see them, let me leave you with a simple fact! - "It's never as bad as The Fox News Channels makes it out to be."

Don't drink the Kool-Aid!

Chico Brisbane

Husband of Ensign's Mistress Asked Fox News For Help

Share |

Doug Hampton, the husband of Cynthia Hampton, who had an affair with Sen. John Ensign, explains in a letter to a Fox News Channel anchorwoman, Megyn Kelly, how the senator’s affair with his wife has"completely ruined" the couple’s lives.

He appealed to Megyn Kelly and to Fox News to help him get this story out. Hampton said that he could have gone to a liberal media outlet but chose Fox for their professionalism. Apperently Mr. Hampton had either forgotten or even worse, had yet to realize that The Fox News Channel is not in the business of reporting on republican's in an unfavorable light

I wonder if Mr. Hampton is still sitting around wondering who could have tipped Senator Ensign off about his plans to go public? Could he possibly still be rationalizing that Senator Ensign's sudden and unexpected press conference was just a coinsidence? - Let me help you out here Mr. Hampton. Don't be such a dope! - Words like trust - professionalism - and Fox News do not belong in the same sentance.

The letter is dated June 11, 2009. Its text follows in full and is published without any corrections to its grammar or spelling.

Thursday, June 11, 2009

Fox News- Corporate Office

1211 Avenue of the America’s (sic)

New York, New York 10036

Megyn Kelly,

More than any time in my life I understand why people take matters into their own hands. I am disheartened! I have sought wise counsel, tried to do the right thing and continue to run into road blocks (sic) in dealing with a very terrible circumstance and injustice that lives in my life. I am hoping you and Fox News can help.

My name is Doug Hampton. I am a former employee of US (sic) Senator John Ensign. I worked for Senator Ensign in his official government office on Capitol Hill from November 2006 to April 2008. My responsibilities were the oversight of his personnel in Washington as well as the state of Nevada. Duties included budgets, policy and public speaking on behalf of the Senator and his initiatives.

Here is my story. In December of 2007 in the midst of some very difficult personal issues that deeply impacted my family and marriage, Senator Ensign pursued and engaged in a relationship with my wife. Our families were lifelong friends, our children attend school together to this day, and our homes are in neighborhoods across from each other. My wife was the Senator’s campaign treasurer.

There is a tremendous amount (sic) of details and critical facts associated with this story and their relationship that will not be addressed in this letter but are very important and need to be further explored if you choose to meet with me. The purpose of this letter is to establish the framework for discussion and provide enough information to warrant a meeting with you and Fox News. This is the only letter of its kind and no other news stations have been contacted with this information. I have great respect and affection for Fox News and many of your collages (sic). I’m sending this to you because you have a legal back ground (sic) and this story has several legal elements.

The unethical behavior and immoral choice of Senator Ensign has been confronted by me and others on a number of occasions over this past year. In fact one of the confrontations took place in February 2008 at his home in Washington DC (sic) with a group of his peers. One of the attendee’s (sic) was Senator Tom Coburn from Oklahoma as well as several other men who are close to the Senator. Senator Ensign’s conduct and relentless pursuit of my wife led to our dismissal in April of 2008. I would like to say he stopped his heinous conduct and pursuit upon our leaving, but that was not the case and his actions did not subside until August of 2008.
The actions of Senator Ensign have ruined our lives and careers and left my family in shambles. We have lost significant income, suffered indescribable pain and emotional suffering. We find ourselves today with an overwhelming loss of relationships, career opportunities and hope for recovery. Our pursuit of justice continues to place me and my family in harm’s way as we fear for our well being (sic).

Today, Senator Ensign’s responsibility and stature have increased within the US (sic) Senate. His is currently the head of "Policy" for the Republican Party, the number four position within the Parties (sic) leadership team. We on the other hand are completely ruined and left to deal with the aftermath of very evil and completely unjustifiable acts by one of our countries (sic) top leaders.

It appears there may be nothing the law can do to correct and bring justice and restitution to (sic) this terrible wrong that has been done to us. I have sought a number of lawyers who are having difficulty finding charges that may hold up in court. There are either technicalities that exist due to the time period in which I have sought help, or other nuances that quite frankly make no sense to me given the egregious acts and blatant abuse of power by Senator Ensign. From my perspective this whole nightmare is terribly wrong and completely unacceptable and should not be tolerated.

I clearly understand this story is difficult to believe for anyone reading (sic) for the first time. I too would have difficulty believing it, if someone brought me this story. However I assure you it is true and there are facts, a paper trail, phone records and personal witnesses to testify to its truth. It is my belief we are dealing with a very powerful person and an institution in the US (sic) Senate that only the media can pierce to expose the wrong and bring light and focus to what needs to be done? (sic) Please help me! This should not be how the leadership of our country should be allowed to behave. I need justice, help and restitution for what Senator Ensign has done to me and my family. Regardless of technicalities, regardless of position, regardless of power this cannot and should not be tolerated in our country from our trusted leaders. Will you help? Will you consider a meeting with me to further discuss this story and what can be done to bring justice and correction to this situation?

I love this country and considered it a great privilege to work in the US (sic) Senate. I am bringing this to you and Fox News to address this professionally and correctly. I could have sought the most liberal, Republican hating media to expose this story, but there are people’s lives at stake and justice is about proper process as well as outcome. Senator Ensign has no business serving in the US (sic) Senate anymore! I will send you and (sic) email as well as leave you and your staff messages in an attempt to meet you and your team as soon as possible. I live and work in Nevada but can be in New York within hours, I look forward to your help.

Sincerely,Doug Hampton

John Ensign Has Reached The Pinnacle of Hyprocracy

Share |

Sen. John Ensign’s political career remains in a free-fall after admitting an affair. Ensign says "I am blessed to have a wife like Darlene who has found it in her heart to forgive me." There is no greater hyprocracy then Ensign fighting tooth and nail to deny others the right to be bound within the sancity of marrige, while he was violating the vows of his own marriage and showing a total disregard for that sacred union. Since Mr. Ensing has proven himself to be an adulterer and a hypocrate, it will be interesting how vocal he intends to be on the issue of marriage and particularly same-sex marriage going forward.

Wednesday, with his resignation from a top

Senate leadership post and increasing uncertainty on Capitol Hill about whether more damaging details of his infidelity would continue to leak out.
Frustrated GOP leaders moved swiftly to distance themselves from the sex scandal, with Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) accepting Ensign’s resignation as chairman of the Republican Policy Committee.

Yet there are several lingering questions over the Nevada Republican’s

extramarital affair with a former campaign aide: Was there an attempt to blackmail Ensign? Have there been other affairs, as The Associated Press has reported? What were the circumstances of the aide and her husband’s departure from Ensign’s staff? Have there been any violations of Senate ethics rules in how the situation was handled with the staffers?

After making a public apology Tuesday,
Ensign stayed away from Capitol Hill and made no public appearances Wednesday. He has yet to fully disclose the extent of his romantic relationship with his former campaign staffer, 46-year-old Cynthia Hampton, which aides say took place between December 2007 and August 2008.

The senator has yet to publicly explain the circumstances of the resignations of Hampton and her husband, Doug, from Ensign’s
staff last year during the affair. The two left his staff in the spring of 2008, even though the affair carried on for months after their departure. Questions continue to linger over why Ensign came forward Tuesday — nearly a year after the relationship ended — whether his admission followed an attempt to extort money from him and if the Hamptons’ departure from his staff was related to the affair.

If Doug Hampton was removed from his office to cover up the affair, "that’d be a big problem," said Melanie Sloan, head of the Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington.
An
attorney representing the Hamptons issued a statement late Wednesday confirming that Cynthia Hampton was the woman with whom Ensign had an affair.

"It is unfortunate the senator chose to air this very personal matter, especially after the Hamptons did everything possible to keep this matter private,"
attorney Daniel Albregts said. "It is equally unfortunate that he did so without concern for the effect such an announcement would have on the Hampton family. In time the Hamptons will be ready and willing to tell their side of the story."

Rumors of another Ensign affair surfaced Wednesday when The Associated Press cited an anonymous source who said Ensign had a relationship with another former aide in 2002 before he took a two-week leave of absence to deal with a personal family matter. An Ensign aide strongly denied the report.


For Republicans still reeling from last year’s election and eager to spotlight their message in advance of big summer battles on the Hill, the Ensign drama was unwelcome news.
This is the third sex scandal that McConnell has had to deal with since he became GOP leader, and the first to befall a member of his leadership team. Former Sen. Larry Craig (R-Idaho) was involved in a men’s room sex sting in 2007, and Sen. David Vitter (R-La.) was implicated in a prostitution scandal in the same year.


The swift movement by Republicans — with Ensign’s consent — to clear him out of leadership was a sign that Senate Republican
Conference now has "zero tolerance" for this kind of scandal at a time when the party is struggling to rebuild, several aides said Wednesday.

"He’s accepted responsibility for his actions and apologized to his family and constituents," McConnell said in a statement. "He offered, and I accepted, his resignation as chairman of the Policy Committee."