Driving liberals, dhimmis and illegal alien apologists absolutely insane since 2005...

Gary Friedman Channels Bernie Madoff

By Greg L | 20 January 2011 | Prince William County | 19 Comments

Gary Friedman, who is running for PWC Chairman as a Democrat, wants you to think his campaign is just humming along.  To that end he’s sent out a campaign statement touting just how great his campaign fundraising is going to the local Lunatics blog, which apparently is willing to publicize anything — no matter how ridiculous it appears, without doing any due diligence whatsoever.  As it turns out, Friedman is lying and the Lunatics don’t seem to care at all.  

Here’s the exclusive, courtesy of our local open borders lobby and Mexica Movement friends:

“While I am not one to consider the strength of political campaigns to be determined by money, I do believe it is important for a candidate to demonstrate an ability to marshal the resources needed to effectively communicate his campaign’s message to the voters. In that regard, I am pleased to announce that the Friedman for Chairman campaign closed the filing period ending December 31, 2010 with over $100,000 cash in its account. I am looking forward to carrying the Democratic banner into the fall elections and championing the most pressing issues facing Prince William County citizens.”

A pretty eye-opening statement from a candidate at this level so early in the election cycle, one certainly meriting a just basic fact checking just to see who would be pouring money into this campaign.  As the actual campaign finance disclosure pretty clearly details the story here is considerably different than what Gary Friedman would want people to believe.  Who is such a blithering idiot that they think nobody is going to bother to look into something like this when the information is available to anyone who asks for it?

Other than Friedman himself, there are zero, nada, zip, none donors to the Gary Friedman for Chairman campaign.  The only contribution to his campaign is $200 that Gary Friedman himself has donated.  The sole significant cash infusion, and the only other source of income to the campaign is a loan by — wait for it now — Gary Friedman for $101,000.  That’s a loan that could be paid back at any time with no financial impact on Gary Friedman unless he decided to raise the cash for it by taking out a second mortgage on his house or something similarly idiotic.  Friedman wants to crow about how his campaign is well financed, implying that he’s getting support from someone else out there other than himself, touts to highly reputable news sources like the Lunatics (perhaps the only ones suckered into this) to try to gain credibility, and in the next reporting cycle the campaign pays the loan back.

I can just see it now: the printing presses are just cranking out direct mail begging other people for money, asking them to join in on this campaign that has garnered such unprecedented early traction, and the whole thing is pretty much a lie.  Not quite a Bernie Madoff kind of lie, but eerily similar in that he’s using dishonest statements in order to solicit “investments” from people who don’t know the actual facts about the current organizational financing.  How wonderfully comforting.  Friedman has zero support, has raised nothing, and is only playing shell games with his own money in order to make intentionally misleading claims about his campaign finances that he hopes will bolster his going-nowhere election effort.

I really had the impression Gary Friedman was way above this sort of duplicity and dishonest dealing.  Up to now I’ve been favorably impressed with how he’s handled himself and his extensive record of public service.  I guess the actual rigors of mounting a campaign have allowed us to see what’s really going on here, and that picture is vastly at odds with the impressions I’ve previously gained.  I guess I should be thankful I have been disabused early of my misconceptions, though.  Others haven’t been so lucky in other circumstances.

In the end it’s difficult to conclude anything but that Friedman is a liar who thinks the voters are so pathetically stupid they can’t manage to uncover outright duplicity that takes but a moment to reveal.  No wonder the Lunatics support him, but who else can possibly trust him now?

The opinions expressed here are solely the views of the author, and not representative of the position of any organization, political party, doughnut shop, knitting guild, or waste recycling facility, but may be correctly attributed to the Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy. If anything in the above article has offended you, please click here to receive an immediate apology.

BVBL is not a charity and your support is not tax-deductible.

You can follow the discussion through the Comments feed. You can also pingback or trackback from your own site.


  1. Jaspar said on 20 Jan 2011 at 4:28 am:
    Flag comment

    Gary Friedman is a liberal fraud.

    Just another bleeding nose leftist do-gooder supporting the use of hard earned tax dollars to abort babies under the mantra of choice while replanting native vegetation under the mantra of life and saving the planet.

  2. Anonymous said on 20 Jan 2011 at 5:56 am:
    Flag comment

    Jaspar has it right. If we are gonna stupidly spend hard earned tax dollars we need to keep the liar in there that we have now.

  3. VA_Magoo said on 20 Jan 2011 at 8:48 am:
    Flag comment

    Just another example of Liberal thinking. His statement is true, “HE” has raised 100K (of his own money). I find it humorous that he wants to brag to his friends how much he has raised. I wonder how much interest he will charge himself for the loan if and when he gets any “real” contributions. After all being a responsible politician, he must pay back his loan. Politics the game of choice for those that have too much time on their hands.

  4. Vpstart said on 20 Jan 2011 at 2:34 pm:
    Flag comment

    Sounds like a Credit Default Swap (CDS). What’s the prob?

  5. Jaspar said on 20 Jan 2011 at 7:00 pm:
    Flag comment

    John Gray is another liberal fraud.

    Just another leftist-hack wannabe smear merchant with a dilapidated comb over that appears more like pubic hairs on a butch hippopotamus.

  6. anon2 said on 21 Jan 2011 at 11:33 am:
    Flag comment

    For some humor - take a look at http://www.moonhowlings.net/index.php/2011/01/21/concerned-citizen-disputes-friedman-attack/

  7. Veteran said on 21 Jan 2011 at 2:15 pm:
    Flag comment

    Greg: Don’t be silent now for crying out loud. Show those moonhowlers for what they are: makers-up-of-info-about Cory. Please give us real info about the Cory allegations from the howlers so we can rest easy.

  8. Veteran said on 21 Jan 2011 at 3:48 pm:
    Flag comment

    greg: It has been 4 hours since anon2 posted. Don’t leave us hanging please!

  9. Patty said on 21 Jan 2011 at 4:28 pm:
    Flag comment


    Did the “makers-up-of-info” cite any links to any reliable sources?

    If not I would take their “report” with a grain…..

    I would suggest you go to the VPAP website. They report on everyone’s contributions.

    I wouldn’t rely on information from a website which is obviously biased against Corey Stewart. That would be the same as trusting the Washington Post to report negative impacts of illegal immigration…..or in the Post’s words, undocumented immigrants (sometimes they drop the undocumented and just use the word immigrant…talk about bias…).

  10. Disgusted said on 21 Jan 2011 at 5:57 pm:
    Flag comment

    I agree with Patty. Greg, please pull Mr. Stewart’s financials and post them here so we may compare.

  11. Greg L said on 21 Jan 2011 at 6:19 pm:
    Flag comment

    Please send me a check.

  12. Veteran said on 21 Jan 2011 at 7:08 pm:
    Flag comment

    Greg: Patty’s right about blog entries not providing citations. It appears that the Moonlooney’s article did cite VPAP but your BVBL post did not provide any verifiable cites. I know you have them, so how about providing them to satisfy Patty?

  13. Greg L said on 21 Jan 2011 at 7:32 pm:
    Flag comment

    What the hell are you talking about? I’m hosting a PDF of Friedman’s actual campaign finance report for cryin’ out loud! What am I supposed to do, link to VPAP data that doesn’t exist yet?

    Good gravy!

  14. Veteran said on 21 Jan 2011 at 7:46 pm:
    Flag comment

    @ Patty: greg is right. One doesn’t need data from VPAP to prove apoint. You are also right; I will not rely on information from a website that is obviously biased. Thanks to both of you.

  15. Veteran said on 21 Jan 2011 at 7:53 pm:
    Flag comment

    @ Patty again: I did what you suggested and went to VPAP. see link below. It appears that the Moonies have a point. Politics as usual. http://www.vpap.org/committees/profile/home_financials/3102

  16. Veteran said on 21 Jan 2011 at 7:54 pm:
    Flag comment

    @ Greg: That didn’t cost a thing !!

  17. Greg L said on 21 Jan 2011 at 9:02 pm:
    Flag comment

    Did VROL PAC put out a press release trumpeting their fundraising prowess as if loaning yourself six figure sums you don’t spend demonstrates anything but an effort to deceive people? No. Only one of these folks put out public statements trying to equate their financial position as an indicator of their public support. Only one of these made huge loans one day before the close of the reporting period, not because the money was needed by the effort, but in order to make a campaign finance report look better than it was.

    The lunatics make no sense. They never do.

  18. Patty said on 22 Jan 2011 at 12:14 pm:
    Flag comment


    I’m not sure what the “moonies” are saying. All I’m saying is if you are going to check contributions go to VPAP.

    You didn’t say what point the “moonies” are making so I can’t respond to that.

    I can say that Greg provided a link where you can see Friedman’s disclosure. Friedman can not make the statement that he has many contributors. He can say he has a little over $100,000.00 but to make that sound like he has many contributors is deceiving.

  19. Peter Danlyn said on 22 Jan 2011 at 5:16 pm:
    Flag comment

    The man said his campaign has money and knows what to do with it.  He “marshaled his resources” to the letter,if not intent of the law, and to the definition, if not the connotation of that phrase. Nothing in the text presented here suggests that public support and campaign finances are linked. Shall we excoriate him or hold him accountable if his choice of words may be misconstrued and lead to inappropriate conclusions or actions by a third party?
    Or would that be unfairly putting him in the crosshairs, er… survey marks: pointing  him out  as being somehow culpable for other people’s actions, taken based on his contribution to the political discourse? And is it okay for another politician to use the same legal tricks if he uses it more discreetly?
    Tough questions,  and not easily reckoned.  It’s a good thing we’ve got Palin, Beck and Leteicq to provide the answers to these questions that bother us so.

Leave a Reply

Views: 2467