Blue Mass Group

Reality-based commentary on politics.

Chet Atkins does Niki’s Dirty Work.

By

My original title was Tsongas Just Lost the Election it was censored. [Note by David: “censored” is such an ugly word, EaBo!  I was just trying to help you with your chronic accuracy problem. đŸ˜‰ ] [Nice you wink at probably the most disgusting low rent political stunt I have ever seen.  Nice David, nice.]

My differently winged friends.  Niki Tsongas and her Campaign Co-Chair Cory Atkins Husband Chet have just gone too far.  You couldn’t leave well enough alone could you.  You had to go there. You had to try to smear Jim Ogonowski by using his Brother John didn’t you. I guess you guys really do subscribe to Marx and his “by any means necessary” mantra don’t you.

The check-bouncing-unethical-former Congressman, and husband of Niki Tsongas’ camaign co-chair Chet Atkins is trying to smear Jim Ogonowski using Jim’s brother John.  This is disgusting and a new low in politics.  For those that don’t know Chet Atkins was one of the check bouncing congressman bounced right out of office in 1992.  Now he and Niki Tsongas are trying to say that he had a relationship with Jim’s brother John and that Jim is “tarnishing” his brother’s legacy, because Jim doesn’t support Amnesty for illegal immigrants.

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. ….

…..Atkins, a Concord Democrat[and husband of Tsongas Campaign co-chair Cory Atkins] 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.

….”I thought that Jim would be like John, and all of the sudden, I see just these hateful words coming out of his mouth and a lot of it is sort of veiled racism and there’s sort of a meanness to it and it was a surprise given my experience with his brother,” Atkins said in an interview with The Associated Press.

That is absolute BS.  Chet Atkins lost his congressional race in 1992 because Republican Michael Conway of Lowell softened him up by running full page, “bounce Chet out of Congress Ads.”.  It had nothing to do with Cambodian Refugees.  That charge is just BS and nothing more.

In fact outgoing Congressman Marty Meehan beat Chet Atkins in the primary in 1992.  Congressman Meehan had this to say about Chet Atkins then:

“If this is an opportunity for me to avoid Chester Atkins’ tearing up my name and tearing at what I’ve worked for in my career ? I gladly will keep this campaign to your and my record.”[Meehan in response to Atkins request that the two sign a No Negative Campaigning Pledge.]…..

….Minutes later, Meehan hit Atkins on the congressional check-kiting scandal and Atkins’ use of tax-paid, franked mail.. –Lowell Sun July 13, 1992

It seems as if Chet is no stranger to smear tactics. Just ask Congressman Meehan.  But lets get back to the charges shall we.

It seems both Jim Ogonowski and Peg Ogonwoski, John’s Widow, have no recollection of John ever mentioning Chester Atkins.

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. ….

….. Peg Ogonowski said in a statement: “I don’t recall whether John ever even spoke to that man. Regardless, how dare they pretend to know John better than his own family does? This is politics at its worst. When you don’t agree with them, they attack you and call you names. When you don’t just say, ‘Just open up the borders for illegal immigrants,’ they call you a racist. Our family is very supportive of legal immigration.”

Jim Ogonowski also questioned whether his brother had known Atkins, saying John Ogonowski was a staunch Republican, “my best friend” and someone who never mentioned the former congressman to him.

Oh and to the racist charge.  Jim Ogonowski explains.

Jim Ogonowski replied: “The Cambodian refugees are here 100 percent legally. There’s no comparison between them and illegal aliens. One are law-abiding people living the American Dream. The other are breaking the law. … We cannot reward criminals, we cannot give amnesty for those who have broken laws, but have to remain a beacon of hope for those who come here legally.”

The Tsongas Campaign has misfired by working with the unethical Chester Atkins to put up this smear campaign.  This should not stand.

Please share widely!
fb-share-icon
Tweet
0

Comments

  1. See diary above.

    <

    p>
    EaBo, the sad fact is that Jim Ogonoswki was the first to make his brother a prominent part of the campaign.  Now you’re upset because someone is speaking admiringly of Jim’s brother?!  Get a grip!

  2. After all the rhetoric heard that this farmer is “not ready for prime time”  and how this is a laugher and runaway for the liberal democrat candidate….its come to this?… raw political sewerage now being flushed into the streets….my Gawwwd, beyond sickening…words fail on this one.  It only highlights the absolute panic that has seized the corrupt party that has held this seat for 33 years and now sees it threatened by a grass roots honest man who doesn’t KNOW Bubba or Ted K or Nancy Pelosi or some other “famous” professional career politician… a man who doesn’t want to be a career politician the rest of his life…. So this is how they “trash” this guy…..This is beyond sickening. And liberals want these “people”(scumbags) to lead them?

      • Somehow, EABOGUY your hysterical-sounding post just does not ring true to me.  Longer and louder is NOT the same as “more convincing”.

        • is just bucolic buffoon with the contest being a laugher, why is it necessary to resort to political sewerage and cheap crap like this?  Listening to a guy with the credibility and reputation of this Chet Atkins  snake is worse than bringing in a convicted felon to testify against an honest man. Seriously, your party and whatever it stands for, should be deeply ashamed of this one. And yes David, words fail me… they should be failing you too.

          • “John was a big-hearted, very, very fair, very open guy,”

            I call that a compliment, not cheap crap.  What’s really eating Ogo isn’t what Atkins is saying about his brother, it is the contrast Atkins draws between the brothers Ogonowski.  Atkins may be right and he may be wrong in his opinion – I have no way of knowing.  But what I do observe here is that Jim Ogonowski seems incapable of defending himself without hiding behind “you dare not invoke the name of John!” type talk. Well, as I mentioned above, Jim invokes the name of John at every turn.  Jim turned his brother into a campaign prop, not Atkins.  So he can’t very well complain when someone else positions that prop in a way he doesn’t like.  To survive in Washington, Jim needs thicker skin than this.

          • What “ad hominem attack language” oh “political sewerage” and “cheap crap” and calling someone a “snake” whom I doubt you know personally [no, I have never met “Chet Atkins” and cannot say anything one way or the other from personal knowledge about him]  “worse then a convicted felon” – that is true ad hominem attack language…

            <

            p>
            I do not find any content in your post O’Tom!

            <

            p>
            Unfortunately, in reading your writing once again all I can find is a string of tawdry insults.

              • Better yet let’s have Marty Meehan Introduce you(Remember I worked as the research director for Marty’s opponent in 2002. I read every Lowell Sun on Microfiche for 10 years and transcribed every article about Marty to MS word.  That’s where I retrieved these gems.)

                <

                p>

                “If this is an opportunity for me to avoid Chester Atkins’ tearing up my name and tearing at what I’ve worked for in my career ? I gladly will keep this campaign to your and my record.”[Meehan in response to Atkins request that the two sign a No Negative Campaigning Pledge.]

                Minutes later, Meehan hit Atkins on the congressional check-kiting scandal and Atkins’ use of tax-paid, franked mail..

                “Chet Atkins doesn’t know what it’s like to get up at 3 o’clock in the morning and walk out to a burned-out house and find a woman and child laying dead, having been murdered.”
                Meehan again accused Atkins of hypocrisy. “It’s not credible for Chet Atkins to talk about cutting the deficit and then to scurry around from Lowell to Lawrence to Methuen saying, ‘What can I do for you? Do you need a new school?'”

                “Chet can’t get around the fact that he is going to be the issue in this campaign,” Meehan said.  He said he does not consider the pledge a ban on campaign ads that attack Atkins’ congressional record or his political career.”

                (Lowell Sun 7/13/1992)

                <

                p>

                “After bouncing 126 checks in the taxpayer-administered House Bank, Chester Atkins is going to have great difficulty getting working men and women to write checks they can’t bounce on their own accounts,” Meehan crowed in a press release – (Lowell Sun 7/19/1992)

                <

                p>

                Meehan has been calling Atkins a political chameleon, noting for example that he voted for a payraise but is now calling for its repeal. (Lowell Sun 8/25/1992(

                <

                p>

                Meehan notes that Atkins has taken donations form Washington, lobbyists, have voted in favor of House pay raises and, most significantly to him, has bounced 126 checks at the House bank.
                “If Chester Atkins can’t manage his own checkbook, ? then how can we trust him to cut the deficit?” Meehan asked last week during a debate at The Boston Globe (Lowell Sun 9/6/1992)

                <

                p>

                “Poor Chet.  He has an opponent who actually wants him to run on his record.  Can you imaging that,” Meehan said, noting that Atkins in 1990 ran ads tying his opponent to Adolf Hitler. (Lowell Sun 9/10/1992)

                <

                p>

                Atkins’ Democratic opponent in Tuesday’s primary election, Martin T. Meehan of Lowell, said criminal wrongdoing was not the point of the check-bouncing controversy.

                “Nobody accused Chet Atkins of any criminal wrongdowing when he bounced 126 checks at the House Bank,” Meehan said in a prepared statement.  “But everybody knows that it was wrong.
                “I have maintained that if members of Congress like Chet Atkins cannot manage their own checkbooks and their own bank, how can we expect them to cut the federal budget deficit and repower our economy,” Meehan said.

                Meehan said Atkins first denied his involvement in the controversy, later blamed his wife, and has since apologized, admitting he was “embarrassed” by his behavior.(Lowell Sun 9/10/1992)

                <

                p>
                My favorite was the tie your opponent to Hitler. Sounds kinda similar doesn’t it.

                • Back in those days I was an unenrolled voters, deep in the trenches of parenting two special needs kids while working full time [which left me barely able to read the paper on Sunday, forget the rest of the week] – I seem to remember a congressman who lost because he was nicknamed “boing boing” – is THAT who this fellow is?  Really I re-entered political life in 2003, incensed at Romney’s veto of 20% of the funding for line item 0321-1510 because it nearly rendered a friend homeless…anyway, the rest is history. 

                  <

                  p>
                  Frankly, I am supporting Nikki Tsongas, rather than attacking her opponent, because of her track record at MCC where my kids attended school, as a good consensus administrator who did her homework.  We need more congress critters male AND female who do their homework and don’t rely on some lobbyist to fill them in on the facts.

                • It’s great, because the codes are visible, much like html.  In MS Word, as you know, codes are hidden, and so too often the program does something the user does not want.  Serisouly, give WP a whirl next time.  You may be pleasantly surprised.

                • It’s great, because the codes are visible…

                  <

                  p>
                  …is why I don’t pay any attention to Word.  I’ve used Wordperfect from day one, since I have easy access to the formatting codes and can delete and edit them at will.  WP12–the latest incarnation–is a very good program.

                  <

                  p>
                  Their incarnations before WP5 had a kludgey equation processor, but with WP8 it was much improved.

                  <

                  p>
                  MS Word is for dummies.

            • immune to public scrutiny and comment with a  court appointed attorney now somehow defending him against the tiresome and endless accusation of the incredibly trite “ad hominem attack” expression that is used ad nauseum here regarding public figures..The guy’s a public figure and a dirtbag. Is that “ad hominem” enough for you?
              By the way, I wouldn’t cash one of Chet’s checks. His reputation isn’t the best, you know when it comes to honesty

              <

              p>
              ‘

              <

              p>

  3. …turns on just one sentence, did the post really need to be this long?

    <

    p>
    Does anyone else find eabo’s outraged Republican act tedious? Every day with the outrage.

    <

    p>
    Why don’t you post some outrage at RMG about Sen. Mitch McConnell attacking a 12-year-old victim of a traumatic brain injury? This Chet Atkins stuff (again, why is this guy relevant to anything and why is his remarks worthy of your precious outrage?) is small potatoes.

    <

    p>
    Clean up the smear and bullshit in your own house, Republicans. Otherwise, your complaints have no legitimacy.

  4. I don’t understand why his headline was censored. The election not having occoured, it clearly was not an attempt to state a fact.

    <

    p>
    Having coincidentally just done some reading of posts from last year, there was more than one comment that Reilly “just lost the election” when the killer coke thing went down. Does it matter that EaBo’s used it in a headline rather than the body?

    <

    p>
    In general, if it’s not actionable or beyond the bounds of good taste, I’d rather posts or headlines NOT be edited.

    <

    p>
    It’s not my site, so do as you will. But it goes to the reputation of the site.

  5. ..Did Niki hire Holly Robichaud for campaign work?

    <

    p>
    Let me take you back to ANOTHER Congressional election.  Ed Teague was House Minority Leader (of 47 GOP’s, not 16) and was running for the open seat vacated by Studd’s retirement.

    <

    p>
    There was a brutal Democratic primary.  Phil Johnston ran against Bill Delahunt, and narrowly won.  But, during a recount involving hanging chads which led to punch-card machines being banned in Mass., the conservative prosecutor (yes, this WAS a while ago) was declared the winner over the Progressive candidate, Johnston.

    <

    p>
    The more liberal (and hardworking) element of the party was displeased, and Delahunt had lukeawarm suppport.  Barnstable and Bristol were strong GOP territories, and Ed was well knon, well liked and a member of House Leadership.  The race was his to lose.

    <

    p>
    And Holly did that for him.  About a week before the election, she designed a negative attack on Delahunt – to be fair, Ed signed off on this as well.  The negative – and to many needless – attacks changed a lot of minds, and Delahunt won narorowly.

    <

    p>
    So – is Holly working her magic once again for The Widow Tsongas?

  6. According to you compatriot Peter Porcupine, Cory Atkins divorced Chet years ago.  So it is disingenuous at best to shriek state that “her Campaign Co-Chair Cory Atkins Husband Chet“.  You should apologize to Cory and Niki for slamming them with a) something said by someone unassociated with the campaign, and b) not bothering to do due diligence on your ‘facts’ and assertions.

Archives