He needs to learn to put a sock in it sometimes, but I have little time for phony outrage over this when nobody seems to have any outrage to spare for the fact that Bernanke hired a former Enron shill to lobby against Fed transparency. I think that's a bit more important than Grayson's choice of words.

I've said it a thousand times, the true function of "truthers" such as Alex Jones is to fatally detract the credibility of anyone who has the misfortune to associate with them. Interviewed with a truther, debate with a truther, say something true which a truther also said ("C.I.A. funded the Taliban" "OMG that guy must be a truther") whatever - any person or idea which comes into contact with trutherism is doomed to be blacklisted from national politics.

Grayson should apologize - to whores for comparing them to lobbyists. Not to make light of the whole sex-industry issue, but at least prostitutes give something of value for the money. Can lobbyists say the same?

Republicans always think everything is about sex. Grayson was talking about politics and is absolutely correct.

"May have gone too far."

Goddamnit. You think THIS is going too far? "K Street Whore" is a pretty apt description for this woman, and most everyone else on K Street. We should all use it more often. Shit's pretty bad out there if you haven't noticed. Largely the result of "K Street Whores."

God, liberals deserve all the 'wussy' name-calling they get.

What do you say to the Glenn Beck Brownshirts? "Why, I never!" "How beastly!"

This reflect the political climate we live in:

Grayson and people like him, even if are making a rational point, have to use sensational and irrational language to gain attention and audience. On the flip side, it is their bytes taken out of context that are highlighted to flag them as illegitimate, bring them down.

I personally would not want to see any elected Dem use the word "whore" against any woman.

Fair or not (IOKIYAR) Grayson's gonna have to refine his firepower. Increased exposure brings increased responsibility. He can still say what he wants to say; he's just going to have to see, design, and utilize his statements as narrative incipits rather than one-off slams, re: the White House's dismantling of Fox News' cover of 'objectivity.' If he can pull it off, he has a bright future. And I gotta take issue with Weiner here - usually I love this guy's work but apparently he has a bad case of circular firing squad-itis. Mr. Weiner might instead take a moment and have a one-on-one in private with his teammate. What policy wonks like Mr. Weiner may not understand is the Democratic Party desperately needs folks like Grayson; there are a lot of folks (read: potential/independent voters) out there who connect with his approach. He just needs a little polish.

Don't get me wrong: I love TPM. But you guys are getting a little...milquetoast lately.

Does anyone else think he looks like Oliver Stone? He even has the gap in his two front teeth.

Killing hundreds of thousands of people across the world and selling out the government to the highest bidder is fine for DC politicians, on the left and on the right, but calling a corporate prostitute a "whore" (or showing boobs on TV)? Watch them faint in horror!

Nothing is more important than reducing the role of lobbyists in Washington, so good for Grayson. Weiner should reflect on the influence of AIPAC whores instead of jumping in front of every camera he can find.

If this lobbyist had been a man, everyone would have understood what Grayson was saying. It was an unfortunate choice of words, even if they are accurate. Most lobbyists are political whores.

He needs to leave the name calling to radio talk show hosts and stick to policies. If a radio person said Cheney had blood dripping from his teeth, I'd laugh. From a member of congress, not so much.

I think Grayson is right on the money on the issues, and I appreciate the fact that we've finally got a Democrat who will stand and fight. But it's possible to be blunt and direct without going over the line into personal insults and political theatre that doesn't help. Grayson's behavior makes it too easy for the corporate media to marginalize him, and that is exactly what they will do, because they value civility over truth. Howard Dean is a better model, IMHO-- he doesn't mince words, and he is fearless when being interviewed.

Not good. Grayson is entertaining, but bad for Democrats. Thanks to Rush, Sean, etc., Republicans have been indecent in their rhetoric for years. Democrats should maintain a contrast. They need to be the adults in the room.

What I love most, is the congressman's spokesman stood by his words! Not the usual "his word were taking out of context, he was misunderstood, he's been under a lot of stress and will soon be entering a conversational rehab."

Here would be my suggested spin to any Dem asked to denounce Grayson:
The RNC is defending the honor of an Enron lobbyist who helped steal from grandmas all across the country.

If you think this through = calling her 'the K street whore' provides an incorrect analysis of her function. She's actually the one brokering the 'relationship' between the customer and the buyer - the seller and the buyer: she, as lobbyist, would actually function as the pimp. The 'John' would be represented by the corporate firms she represents - they are they ones coming up with the money, yes? And so the term'whore' would then be more accurately applicable by those residing in the K Street brothel - yes?

If the dildo fits, wear it.

I feel a bit uncomfortable with Grayson, not because of what he says, but because of how much he's saying. This said, it's about time we had a dem. congressman who is not afraid to speak the truth for us, but by choosing carefully the issues he speaks to, his impact would be greater and offer less to the opposition to denigrate. Thanks for speaking, but be careful.

K Street lobbyists ARE a bunch of whores. How is this a story? Thank you Mr. Grayson for speaking truth to power and refusing to back down to the thugs that peddle stories like this.

What's the problem? K Street lobbyists are whores. they probably joke about this among themselves. This is hardly a novel observation. I'm happy to see Grayson amp up the rhetoric.

This is an interesting article in journalese. Eric reported the public conflicting statements, then added the explanation by Grayson's spokesman followed by two attacks on Grayson, one by the right-wing leaning Politico and the other by the NRCC. There's no hint where the accurate balance might lie.

But this is from Wikipedia about Grayson:

He graduated from Bronx High School of Science and worked his way through Harvard University, graduating in three years, summa cum laude and Phi Beta Kappa. He worked as an economist for two years, but then returned to Harvard for graduate studies. Within four years, he earned a law degree with honors from Harvard Law School, a masters in public policy from the John F. Kennedy School of Government and completed the course work and passed the general exams for a Ph.D. in government.[3][4]

After writing his master's thesis on gerontology, Grayson founded the Alliance for Aging Research, and served as an officer of the organization for more than 20 years.[1]

Grayson very probably knows what he is talking about. Linda Robinson was apparently a media flack ("whore") for Enron. That's a major strike against her. I'll take Grayson over Robertson and the right-wing press any day. Grayson seems to have it all together, and if there is a right-winger in America today who that can be said of, he or she damned sure isn't putting his head above ground in the current climate of right-wing idiocy.

Bottom line, she insulted his intelligence and he responded by calling her a whore. It sounds childish and petty to use that kind of language as an insult, particularly to a woman. There's just no getting around it.

You can call a man and a woman a corporate whore, but the sexual meaning of the word has a different impact when used against a woman than it does against a man. Bad choice of words this time.

It seems to me the rise of the Reich was brought about by the GOP posturing, to a great degree. People went with them because they appeared the stronger party. It has been shown that the drama of an interaction can be more effective in infuencing people then what is actually said. Can anyone explain how it is that so many people were unable to see what their best interests were and reelected Bush? I mean, he won the popularity contest in 2000, being the one with whom people wanted to share some beers, and in 2004, the tough guy. {Note: I'm not saying he actually won, but that it was close enough to steal.} So, I'm okay with Grayson posturing and primping for the folks who cannot see their own best interests through the smoke and mirrors. He identified her very plainly. He might have used a different word, but woud we be talking about her if we did? People really get it now. She did "tricks" for Enron. He spoke their language.

Hooray for Congressman Grayson! Hoyer and Weiner need to grow a pair. The NRCC, being experts on vile and vulgar, should just slither back under that rock, and save their breath for the next time they have to defend one of the kid-touchers they helped to put into office.

Found Grayson's remarks about the lobyist on YouTube, starting at 2:30 on this video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CuRHZXgLMmw

It's an insult to whores to compare them to lobbyists.

Grayson's language may have been over the top but he needs to say a thousand worse things than this to even equal the foulness of today's Republican Party.

Let me know when Grayson does what the Republicans do every day on every issue, which is to accuse their opponents of "wanting to take away our freedom and DESTROY AMERICA!!!"

It may be impolitic but it's not necessarily untrue.

Why was Grayson talking to Alex Jones in the first place? To call Jones a "right-wing talker" is an insult to folks like Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity. Jones is a paranoid conspiracy freak, whose Anti-Semitic fantasies make Limbaugh and Hannity look like Edward R. Murrow in comparison.

No Democrat should be talking to Alex Jones. Period. No sane person should be talking to him. It's amusing to me that the same people who assail any Democrat goes on Fox News as a weakling, are now praising their new truth-telling hero for something he said on the Alex Jones show.

Keep in mind that Jones is someone--in addition to his multiple fraudulent 9/11 conspiracy claims--has a film out called "The Obama Deception" in which he claims that so-called banker "elites" engineered the 2008 Wall Street crash in order to install their "puppet" Barack Obama as President of the United States. The is the same paranoid Anti-Semitic bullshit the John Birch Society peddled years ago. Why in the hell would any good Democrat--an elected Democrat no less--be willing to lend legitimacy to that hateful freak show by appearing on it?

Grayson needs to dial it back a bit. Just a bit. Overboard comments like this one and Cheney as a vampire dripping blood from his teeth will ruin how effective he can be. There's a big difference between trash talk and sharp wit.

She's beyond whore. She's the Madam.
http://www.sovereignsociety.com/2009Archives1stHalf/060809FedBringsonEnronsLindaRobertson/tabid/5732/Default.aspx

Anyone else still wondering why the GOP carpetbagged this district with an opponent?

It's good to see a Democrat spout a pair for a change. And this is fairly tame compared to Repugs. This will not hurt Grayson in the long run. Besides, that is the way I or anyone I know would describe lobbyists. It's real person talk. It's honest. What's he supposed to say as an apology - Sorry, I didn't mean that she was an actual prostitute as in sex for money?

I dunno - when major players who lead and/or are associated with the opposition party regularly call the sitting President a communist, fascist, Nazi, socialist, liar, cheater, and many other grievously insulting names (e.g., shouting out "liar" during a national address before a joint session of Congress, and then defending it after the fact, almost immediately after a half-assed apology, to the daily load of propaganda from Faux News), getting this worked up over somebody calling a former Enron bigwig who makes her living on K Street as an hourly rate "public face" [hit man? hit person?] for companies or people who have hired her to work the political system and media for their financial benefit a "K Street Whore" seems a little oversensitive. K Street Whore is, incidentally, an expression that has been out there for years, and has been used much more commonly to describe males than females, largely because males still dominate the K Street lobbying world. But to apologize because some douchebag (or several douchebags) in the GOP and the corporate media get their panties in a wad (sorry for the sexist metaphor) is a classic reflection of what a bunch of total pussies the democrats have become.

Thankfully, Grayson doesn't seem to give a $hit. I hope he keeps it up, making the idiots and a-holes on the right squirm, and helping the pussies who call themselves "Democratic party leaders" in the center-left to grow a pair. Sheesh.

A rose is a rose...She's a player in a very high stakes dirty business (if this is an authentic memo from her Enron days [snagged from a Ron Paul site http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?t=194860]):

Quote:
To: Ken Lay and Steve Kean
From: Enron governmental affairs executive Linda Robertson
Date: June 1, 2001
Subject: The President's Dinner, A Congressional Salute Honoring President Bush and Vice President Cheney, June 7, 2001, in Washington, DC
...The President's Dinner is a joint fundraising effort by the National Republican Congressional Committee (NRCC) and the National Republican Senatorial Committee (NRSC). We contacted both Congressman Tom DeLay and the House Senate Dinner committee to ensure that Enron could fully participate in The President's Dinner and receive credit for money we have already committed to the Committees earlier this year.
With the assistance of Congressman Tom DeLay, we were able to apply our previously contributed soft money toward this dinner. Consequently, we will be credited as giving $250,000 to this event, even though we are being asked to give only $50,000 in new soft money. Our earlier contributions of $100,000 each to the NRCC and NRSC will make up the remaining money. You will be listed as Co-Chair of the event, the highest level of giving. We will be crediting Congressmen DeLay, Armey, Barton and Tauzin for raising the $100,000 allocation for the NRCC. As for $100,000 we earlier gave the NRSC, Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison has requested that Enron give her some credit for raising the money. We would like to split it among several other Senators.
In addition, Congressman Tom DeLay has asked Enron to contribute $100,000 to his leadership committee, ARMPAC, through a combination of corporate and personal money from Enron's executives. ARMPAC funds will be used to assist other House Members as well as the redistricting effort in Texas. We will be meeting this request over the course of this calendar year...