I have been reading in several places (Hub Politics especially) about the low, base, contemptible statements made by former Massachusetts representative Chet Atkins regarding Jim Ogonowski.
Ex-Rep. says Ogonowski strays from brother’s immigration legacy
BOSTON - Former Rep. Chester G. Atkins, who once held the congressional seat being sought by Republican Jim Ogonowski, said today the candidate is tarnishing the legacy of his late brother, John, with a stance against illegal immigration that borders on racist.
Jim Ogonowski responded by calling the charge "a new low in politics," while Peg Ogonowski, the widow of John Ogonowski, said she was never aware her late husband had met Atkins.
Atkins, a Concord Democrat who lost his 1992 re-election campaign in part because of a backlash over his support for Cambodian refugees resettling in his Merrimack Valley district, said John Ogonowski was an avid backer of his efforts because of his family’s heritage as Polish immigrants.
John Ogonowski later supported a program in which he let Cambodians use a plot of his own farmland to grow specialty crops for Asian markets.
You can read the rest here.
Suffice to say that:
a) Chet Atkins forgets himself. You do not use a man's dead brother against him in a campaign. I don't care how many times Jim mentions John......his opponents don't get to, period.
b) Like most Democrats, Atkins can't distinguish between "legal" and "illegal" immigrants.
c) Playing the "pig fucker" card worked for Lyndon Johnson and you, Mr. Atkins, are no Lyndon Johnson. So I hope that you calling Jim a racist comes right back and smacks you in the ass.
d) Mr. Atkins says that he lost his seat because of his support of the Cambodian refugees, lol, good one. That fairy tale is shredded here.
I think the Wikipedia entry for Mr. Atkins tells you everything you need to know -
Atkins ran and was successfully elected as a Democrat to the 99th Congress in 1984. He served there for four succeeding Congresses (January 3, 1985–January 3, 1993). In his 1990 reelection bid, Atkins won by a surprisingly thin margin for the heavily Democratic 5th district, and as a result, in 1992, Democrats backed Democratic challenger Martin T. Meehan, fearing the seat could fall to the Republicans. His last campaign was riddled with accusations of check-bouncing and mis-managing his own finances.
That's right, even the Democrats wouldn't back him. Niki, I know politics makes for strange bedfellows.......but how desperate are you? I thought the Emily's List commercials were low for being misleading......but this is much worse.