Democrats Block Attempt To Even Debate Jack "Abscam" Murtha's Threat To Stop All Federal Spending In Congressman's District

...due to this fellow Congressman daring to inquire about a particularly shady Murtha Special.

Old Democratic Promise: "The most ethical Congress in history"

New Democratic Promise: "The most ethical Congress in... the Capitol Building"

I'm not even sure they'll be able to manage that much.

House Democrats rejected a Republican bid Tuesday to reprimand Rep. John Murtha, a senior lawmaker accused of threatening legislative reprisals against a GOP member who had crossed him.

Before and after the largely party-line vote, which caused some Democrats discomfort, Republicans taunted Democratic leaders about their campaign promises to run a more ethical and open Congress.

The House voted 219-189 to kill the Republicans' motion to reprimand Murtha, a Pennsylvania Democrat, Iraq war foe and close ally of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif.

Two Democrats - Earl Blumenauer of Oregon and Jim Cooper of Tennessee - voted against killing the motion. One Republican - Tim Murphy of Pennsylvania - voted for the motion to table, or kill, the proposed reprimand.

Murtha, known for his gruff manner and fondness of pork barrel projects, did not dispute claims that he charged across the House floor May 17 to confront Rep. Mike Rogers, R-Mich.

Rogers had tried unsuccessfully to strike a $23 million Murtha earmark - a targeted spending item - for a drug intelligence center in Murtha's district.

In a House speech Monday, Rogers said Murtha threatened him by saying, "you will not get any earmarks now and forever." Rogers, backed by House GOP leaders, said Murtha's threat violated congressional ethics rules.

AP doesn't seem to have many details about the exchange, despite the fact the dialogue was included in Rogers' complaint (shocker!). Allah noted it at the time:

“I hope you don’t have any earmarks in the defense appropriations bills because they are gone and you will not get any earmarks now and forever,” Murtha told Rogers on the House floor, according to the draft transcript supplied to The Politico.

“This is not the way we do things here — and is that supposed to make me afraid of you?” Rogers replied.

“That’s the way I do it,” Murtha said.

Back to the current article:

In conversations with colleagues and reporters, Democrats played down the incident. Murtha is known for blowing off steam, they said, and his comments to Rogers were too vague to constitute a genuine violation of ethics rules.

"It's time to put on your long pants and grow up," Rep. George Miller, D-Calif., said in an interview when asked how Democrats would respond.

...

When Democrats took control of the House and Senate in January, they vowed to reform the practice of placing earmarks in spending bills. Members seeking earmarks would have to identify themselves and their intentions in time for staffers to review the items, leaders said.

Republicans said the vote showed Democrats' hypocrisy.

Smart, tough.

Older story:

A week ago Rogers offered a procedural motion to the fiscal 2008 intelligence bill that would have prevented funding for an earmark Murtha sponsored to authorize $23 million for the National Drug Intelligence Center, a government agency based in his district.

Rogers said Murtha approached him on the House floor Thursday and told him: “I hope you don’t have any earmarks in the defense appropriations bills because they are gone and you will not get any earmarks now and forever.”

Rogers argues that the threat is a violation of House rules, which preclude members from conditioning earmarks on a members’ vote. House Rule XXIII, Clause 16 states that members “may not condition the inclusion of language to provide funding for a congressional earmark, a limited tax benefit, or a limited tariff benefit in any [legislation].”

Rogers’ resolution to reprimand Murtha does not seek an ethics committee investigation into the matter.

Murtha's office released the following statement: "The committee and staff give every Democrat and Republican the same consideration. We have extensive hearings and every request is carefully considered. We will continue to do just that."

Let me get this straight: The MSM went bananas over the "partisan corruption of the law" when Bush wanted to fire attorneys who were his at-will employees, but the MSM says not a fucking word when Abscam Murtha indulges in the "partisan corruption of the legislative process"?

I'm sure we'll be seeing nightly updates about this and full-court-press front-page coverage in all the papers.

God-damn them all to hell. I'm so sick of this shit.