Showing posts with label murkowski. Show all posts
Showing posts with label murkowski. Show all posts

Thursday, October 7, 2010

Carney: Murkowski's 'Alaska Mafia' and the public dole

*
Timothy P. Carney, senior columnist for the Wasington Examiner, connects all the dots to sketch a picture of the corrupt Stevens-Young-Murkowski-K Street octopus that Sarah Palin has been fighting for years in Alaska:
Once insurgent conservative Joe Miller knocked off moderate Sen. Lisa Murkowski in Alaska's Senate primary, almost all Beltway Republicans lined up behind Miller. But thanks to Alaska's unique political culture, there is a small cadre -- mostly former staffers for Murkowski and other Alaska lawmakers -- supporting her quixotic write-in race for re-election.

Murkowski's bid has brought attention to a quiet but significant clique on K Street composed of former aides to Murkowksi, her father, Frank, former Sen. Ted Stevens, and Rep. Don Young, who specialize in lobbying for energy interests, Alaskan natives, and Alaska's towns and cities. The phrase "Alaska mafia" slips off the tongue of many Republican staffers, activists, and lobbyists who have dealt with this clique.

"They've done a very good job of looking out for each other," one Republican lobbyist told me. Stevens, Young and the Murkowskis have shared plenty of staff, and sent dozens of aides to lobby on K Street. These aides served as invisible middlemen in the earmark machine run by the venerable Alaska Republicans.

Stevens was a champion porker who once bragged, "I am guilty of asking the Senate for pork and proud of the Senate for giving it to me." Young was chairman of the House Transportation Committee. Lisa Murkowski was put on the Appropriations Committee in her first full term, and her father chaired the Energy and Natural Resources Committee before becoming governor.

Their aides grease the skids, cash in on K Street, and then donate to Murkowski and Young...

(More)
These are just the opening stanzas of a very thorough investigation by Carney. Read his full exposé here.

- JP

Friday, August 27, 2010

Asman: Frank Murkowski thought Sarah Palin could be bought off. He was wrong.

*
David Asman of Fox Business reports that the political revolution Sarah Palin started in Alaska in 2006 is causing political empires to crumble just four years later:



- JP

Wednesday, April 8, 2009

Palin has 'no intention' of challenging Murkowski

The Alaska Daily News is reporting that, according to a spokesperson for Gov. Sarah Palin:
"The governor has no intention of running for the senator's seat in 2010. She thinks the senator is doing a great job and that's why she's looking forward to hosting a fundraiser for her."
Meg Stapleton also told ADN yesterday speculation that Gov, Palin might challenge Sen. Murkowski in the 2010 GOP primary is "just something that's been drummed up by the media."

The Alaska Dispatch had called this correctly April 1, saying that word on the street was that Gov. Sarah Palin was planning to help Sen. Murkowski with a fundraiser.

Ivan Moore, an Anchorage-based pollster and political consultant, said this should bring and end to media speculation of a contest between Murkowski and Palin:
If Palin is interested in the U.S. Senate, Moore said, a more plausible scenario would be her running for governor in 2010, serving a second term, and then challenging Alaska Democratic Sen. Mark Begich when his term is up in 2014.
That is also what I said in early December.

Politico referenced the ADN story in a short piece today. Interestingly, Stapleton's charge that the media has tried to stir up a mud wrestling match between Palin and Murkowski doesn't seem that far-fetched. Politico appears to be one of the usual suspects, with several items like this one. Barely two weeks after the Politico item was published, the nutroots got into the act, with Daily Kos commissioning a Research 2000 poll showing that in a hypothetical matchup between the two women for Murkowski's job, Palin would win by 55 to 31. That was followed a scant two weeks later by another survey, the latter one paid for by Palin nemesis Dan Fagan, with almost the opposite result - Murkowski retaining her seat by 58 to 31. What is wrong with these two pictures?

If Moore is right, the children will give up this nonsense. But those who want to make mischief for Sarah Palin are a determined bunch. Why let facts get in the way when you're trying to sow the seeds of conflict?

- JP