In the thread about donors to the various Lt Gov candidates started by Robert P, there were charges of xenophobia thrown around.
See if you can find somewhere in that big vocabulary an actual reason why it is somehow improper to accept out of state money - a reason which does not rely on (a) unfounded fear of others or (b) outdated ideas of place and community.
I am not sorry that I pointed out that there was no rational ground for fear of those outside North Carolina who support Hampton Dellinger.
What if that money came from an unacceptable source? A source of decidedly non-progressive background?
Throughout this campaign the supporters of Hampton Dellinger, and his campaign, have continuously tried to cast him as the most progressive choice. When its pointed out that Dan Besse is in the race, they retreat (a little) and say that Hampton is the most progressive who has a chance at winning, because money is apparently all that matters.
Early on I asked the question, “How do I know he is progressive, other than the fact that he says he is every 10 minutes?” The response I got was effectively “judge me by the company I keep”. Because Hampton has never run for office before, he uses his work experience to establish himself. And, for the most part, it’s a logical argument.
But, with the most recent fight over financing of campaigns, one is left with an interesting question. How about that company that Dellinger keeps?
In his most recent email, and fliers at the debate, and in just about every other possible place, Hampton has said Dalton is wrong on choice, wrong on the environment and wrong on education. So, I started doing some looking, to see if Dellinger was right on any of those things. Because I know that my top candidate, and my second candidate are both right on those issues. And not just right, but impressive. Dan Besse’s environmental record is unmatched. And when Pat talks about education he shows a breadth and depth of understanding that few could hope to match.
Since Dellinger has no record, and he has asked us to judge him by his friends, lets do some looking.
A few weeks ago, someone pointed out that Dellinger spent time at Womble-Carlyle, pointing out their unsavory ties to groups such as Blackwater. Now, I don’t think that we should engage in guilt by association with a law firm that has over 500 lawyers. But taking money from people who represent unsavory and non-progressive, that is another thing altogether.
Frank Eaton has already pulled out some names of members of the tobacco industry who gave Hampton money. What else was I able to find?
In recent years, Cris has made a specialty of defending corporate officials at such companies as Enron, Tosco, British Petroleum, Avant!, and Critical Path.
Pharmaceutical pricing litigation: Represented one of the world’s largest drug manufacturers, in a series of class actions filed against the industry relating to the pricing of prescription drugs covered by Medicare and Medicaid. The claims at issue, brought on behalf of patients, government and private payors, included a variety of antitrust, RICO and consumer protection claims brought under federal and state laws in both state and federal courts.
Member of the trial team that defended the former President, COO, and CEO of Enron in a four-month criminal trial in Houston, Texas (currently on appeal), and in numerous civil proceedings
Represented Exxon in the Valdez oil spill litigation brought by the native corporations and municipalities.
Michael Milken’s attorney and law firm in FDIC and class action lawsuits relating to a high-yield bond market
Former chairman of National Bank of Georgia in grand jury and congressional investigations alleging the bank to have been used as a front for BCCI
Northrop executive in Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, Korean bribery, grand jury, and Congressional investigations
An oil refinery in the criminal investigation of employee deaths resulting from a refinery explosion
Defending Jeffrey Skilling, the former CEO of Enron, in his criminal trial and on appeal. Matt's work, as primary brief writer for the team, was featured in the Houston Chronicle. Matt was also the lead associate preparing Mr. Skilling to testify. Matt assisted on all aspects of the trial, from argument to witness examination, and he is currently working on Mr. Skilling's appeal.
Within the last three years, among other matters, Mr. Oppenheimer has tried cases for:
A major oil producer, successfully securing a judgment barring claims for alleged human rights abuses in a foreign country
A major oil producer, successfully obtaining a complete defense jury verdict against claims that it owed in excess of $30 million to various Alaskan municipalities for unpaid oil spill clean up costs. The jury awarded zero. This verdict became one of the National Law Journal's top defense verdicts for 2002.
Co-lead outside counsel for a major oil producer in the successful defense of land damage claims in the aftermath of an oil spill (in the face of aggregate claims exceeding $350 million, the Alaskan jury awarded less than $7 million in claims for damages to native lands, in one case awarding the native corporation plaintiff zero dollars in damages.) (Different trial from the 2002 trial mentioned previously.)
Now then, for a candidate who tells us that he is progressive, who puts out fliers saying that we should support him and not Dalton because of the Cliffside plant, are these friends consistent? Just take a look back at those names. Enron, Exxon, human rights abuses, oil spills.
To address any attacks that I expect to see, and answer any other questions:
Hampton’s father is a partner in O’Melveny and Myers. That firm has offices across the nation. Many of their members gave money to Hampton. There is nothing bad about that.
Yes, I did cherry pick donors. Why? Because I can. Or, more specifically, since I cant cherry pick Hampton’s record, I might as well cherry pick his donors.
Why the “constant stream of anti-Hampton” information from me? Well, to be honest, I am tired and angry. I am angry that in a field with FOUR pro-choice candidates I have to listen to someone say he is more pro-choice, even though one of those candidates has been involved in the choice movement since Hampton was in high school. I am angry that I had to watch as one candidate talked about inviting the people to be involved when he was elected, while Hampton turned his back on the people in a forum audience to chastise a fellow Democrat.
I don’t think there is anything in this to make someone vote against Hampton Dellinger. It should take a lot more than the partisan claims of one person to vote against any of these 4 people (And I am proudly partisan). But, the deeper I look, the more I am convinced that this race breaks into two categories. On one side are the consummate insider and the politics as usual candidates. On the other side are the liberal outsider and the outsider with different ideas.
Im tired of politics as usual, and insiders.