Advertisement

Archive for Monday, October 18, 2010

Report: Kansas Republicans opposed American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, but sought stimulus funding

Kansas Republicans, from left, Todd Tiahrt, Lynn Jenkins, Pat Roberts, Jerry Moran and Sam Brownback.

Kansas Republicans, from left, Todd Tiahrt, Lynn Jenkins, Pat Roberts, Jerry Moran and Sam Brownback.

October 18, 2010, 12:02 p.m. Updated October 18, 2010, 8:13 a.m.

Advertisement

Related document

Moran letter to LaHood ( .PDF )

Related document

Jenkins letter to LaHood ( .PDF )

Related document

Brownback letter to LaHood ( .PDF )

Related document

Brownback on behalf of Victory Electric ( .PDF )

Related document

Kansas delegation-Broadband ( .PDF )

Related document

Moran letter on behalf of Exide ( .PDF )

— Last year, U.S. Sen. Sam Brownback, R-Kan., criticized the federal economic stimulus bill as “an old-fashioned grab-bag spending bill.”

But that hasn’t stopped Brownback and his fellow Republicans who voted against the bill from working behind the scenes to secure funding under it.

The nonprofit, nonpartisan Center for Public Integrity reported that scores of U.S. House and Senate members who opposed the bill, and voiced strong criticism of it, later tried to win approval of certain projects under the legislation.

Kansas’ Republican congressional delegation fits that description, lobbying for tens of millions of dollars in projects.

Brownback, who is now the Republican candidate for governor, U.S. Sen. Pat Roberts and U.S. Reps. Jerry Moran, Todd Tiahrt and Lynn Jenkins all voted against the $787 billion American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, but all wrote letters seeking government spending under the act, according to the report. The measure was essentially pushed through by President Barack Obama and his fellow Democrats.

In records rounded up by the Center for Public Integrity, Brownback wrote to U.S. Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood seeking approval for a road project in Olathe. He also wrote the Energy Department for a grant proposal submitted by Victory Electric for an electric grid project.

Moran, R-Kan., who is now the GOP candidate for Senate, wrote to LaHood in support of a grant for the intermodal facility near Gardner. Moran also wrote to Energy Secretary Steven Chu to support a proposal from Exide Technologies for a grant for manufacturing advanced batteries. Exide, based in Georgia, has 1,000 employees in Kansas, according to Moran’s letter.

Jenkins, R-Kan., wrote LaHood in favor of a project to spend money on improving freight rail lines, saying it was needed to help the Kansas economy.

Roberts wrote the Commerce Department to offer his support for a grant application by Sunflower Broadband of Lawrence to provide telecommunications service in rural northeast Kansas.

The entire Kansas delegation signed a letter for a broadband grant for the Kansas Farm Bureau. Kansas congressional officials wrote several additional letters seeking broadband funding.

Brownback, Moran and Jenkins, who are all on the ballot Nov. 2, did not respond to a request for comment on the new report.

This isn’t the first time Brownback has been noted for his opposition to the stimulus bill while also seeking funding from it.

Last year, Brownback issued a news release applauding a $1.78 million federal grant to help build a rail spur in Hutchinson. The grant was made possible by the stimulus bill.

At the time, Democrats criticized Brownback, saying that if Brownback had had his way, the federal stimulus bill would have never passed.

Here is a link to the study http://www.publicintegrity.org/articles/entry/2532/

Comments

Shardwurm 4 years, 1 month ago

Sounds like a good idea to me. Just because you oppose its passing doesn't mean you want to cut your nose off to spite your face.

yourworstnightmare 4 years, 1 month ago

Nice try. Its called hypocrisy.

I agree that one can oppose its passage but take advantage of it. It is quite another to run a political campaign against it while a the same time claiming it is needed to stimulate the economy.

Shameful, even by GOP standards.

Shardwurm 4 years, 1 month ago

LOL...yeah no Democrat would ever do this.

Talk about hypocricy.

John Hamm 4 years, 1 month ago

Sorry - gotta disagree. They tried to block it but once the money is going out they'd be silly and not acting in KS best interest to not get some for KS. It's called "looking out for your constituents."

jafs 4 years, 1 month ago

Thanks - you saved me the trouble!

blindrabbit 4 years, 1 month ago

Two faced Repubs. just trying to hide from the voters; but at the front of the slop trough line when the hogs are fed. The real meaning of "pork barrel". All will claim "look what I've done for Kansas" while bellyaching about the stimulus vote!

Rich Noever 4 years, 1 month ago

Sounds like typical democrat hypocrisy also. You have tunnel vision.

BrianR 4 years, 1 month ago

Say one thing and do the exact opposite. Sounds pretty senatorial to me.

Fred Whitehead Jr. 4 years, 1 month ago

Yup, what would you think? These greasy politicians are the most hypocritical jerks on the planet. Their political ads attack candidates in the Democratic party for supporting the stimulus from the federal government, they make it look like every Republican Terrorist Party candidate is running against the Speaker of the House and the current president. Yeah, they should have let GM close down and AIG fail. That would have been a great Republican Terrorist idea! Then you would really see what national dysfunction would have been all about.

Frankly, I hope they all get their candidates elected, and then sit and watch as the economy rockets up, the trade imbalance is reversed, jobs bloom like spring flowers, and everyone gets unimagined prosperity. Isn't that what the Republican Terrorist Party is telling us?? Well, get out and vote for these miracle workers, I am ready to see a huge turn-around in the national fortune and our ascendance into the land of milk and honey!!!!!!!! GOP will take us there!! (Well, isn't that what they are saying???????)

HMcMellon 4 years, 1 month ago

I do not understanding why we should turn the government over to those who screwed it up, especially when they talk about going back to the same policies that caused the problems in the first place.

63BC 4 years, 1 month ago

(1) It was a bad idea. Our folks voted no. Good.

(2) The Democratic majority did it anyway, taking tax dollars FROM Kansas to do it.

(3) At that point, shouldn't the Kansas delegation try to get some of our money back?

Perfectly reasonable.

bradh 4 years, 1 month ago

With Congress considering another stimulus bill it seems perfectly reasonable to complain about the program so we don't waste more trillions of dollars with a repeat that doesn't work. You may not like the program and may not want another, but if it is out there and you are paying for it you might as well use it.

Moderateguy 4 years, 1 month ago

I completely agree. There is no story in that however. It needed some spin.

monheim 4 years, 1 month ago

I think where we lose each other is somewhere around #2. What makes you think Kansas wouldn't gotten any of it's money back anyway? That was sort of the point....I know right now it's popular to call that "redistribution" or "Leninism" or whatever, but...that was the whole point. The stimulus bill created a pool of money for states and localities to request funds from. Which is what we're doing now...and getting funds...and building things.

George Lippencott 4 years, 1 month ago

Just why should we be precluded from obtaing stimulus funds because some of our leaders did not want to spend money we do not have when we can not meet our current obligations. Once the bill past I do not consdier it a problem to seek projects since we are going to pay for it anyway (higher taxes, inflation, cuts in benefits, etc.). This sounds like a politically motivated tract and a bunch of you are falling for it.

gudpoynt 4 years, 1 month ago

Because they continue to go on and on about how the stimulus is evil incarnate.

None of them will ever admit to the stimulus having helped (or had the potential to help) their constituency in any way. They want the stimulus issue to remain black and white for their voters. Admitting that it may have done some good would add too much gray.

We should not be precluded from obtaining stimulus funds, nor do I think those who voted against it should refrain from applying the money now that it has been allocated. I think it would, in fact, be irresponsible to not even try to take advantage of the opportunity.

But if there is a benefit from it, they should give credit where credit is due. But that might involve admitting that there might have been some good ideas coming from the other side of the aisle. And fat chance of hearing that come out of ANY politicians mouth, Elephant, Donkey or otherwise, any time soon.

George Lippencott 4 years, 1 month ago

gudpynt

OK. I agree nothing is all evil or all good (almost nothing). As I see it we really do not know whether the stimulus was a good or bad thing in the aggregate. We spent a lot of money. Economists can not agree on what it did. I sure do not know. Perhaps in time with better prespective it may be more clear.

I do know that a lot of what has been termed stimulus went to unemployment (still no jobs and not retrained for what jobs there are), public employees (strong supporters of the Democratic Party and untimately paid by local taxes), Infrasturcture (good investment but focused on loyal Democratic Unions - be interesting to see what really got built - the sidewalk near my home does not seem a good investment) and so on

Did the stimulus avoid a melt down or just create a massive and economically depressing debt???

overthemoon 4 years, 1 month ago

given that the stimulus is still in progress and has yet to be fully implemented, its more of the former.

ferrislives 4 years, 1 month ago

How's TomShewmon to defend this one? I best it's Obama's fault. Their hypocrisy has been busted.

Boston_Corbett 4 years, 1 month ago

Tom must have gotten some of the stimulus money to pay for his cable bill.

slowplay 4 years, 1 month ago

I'm sure he will blame it on the liberal media.

blindrabbit 4 years, 1 month ago

63bc: Based on your logic about Kansas getting it's stimulus money back, you ought to be happy about the money returning to Kansas (Ft. Riley) from soldiers returning from Dubya's misguided wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. Being a Viet Vet, it is apparent to me that those "wars" were trumped-up to satisfy Cheney's Haliburton monetary greed; dummy Dubya just followed along. Blood money to me!

BigAl 4 years, 1 month ago

Once again, Tom is right. That "leftist" Rothschild is making all those double talking Republicans take the subsidy money. Including Brownback taking personal farm subsidies.

Of course, you won't see this factual report on Fox News and you won't hear about it on talk radio. Fair and balanced.

In Tom's world, the press is "leftist" unless it is hammering Obama all day, every day, on every issue.

BigAl 4 years, 1 month ago

You may be right Tom. And that is exactly what FOX News does every day on a national level.

David Albertson 4 years, 1 month ago

All of this coming from someone with a Faux News avatar. HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!!!!

Jimo 4 years, 1 month ago

Seriously? This is it? Your comment is to simply fart in our face? Have you considered running as a Tea Party candidate?

ferrislives 4 years, 1 month ago

Tom, I'll bet a lot of money that these Kansas senators are not the only ones doing this in the great U.S. of A.

ferrislives 4 years, 1 month ago

By the way, if you follow the link provided above (http://www.publicintegrity.org/articles/entry/2532/), you WILL see a large list of senators from across America doing the same thing. This actually COULD end up as a national story, although I believe that you'll somehow blame the leftist media conglomerate

Regardless of your political views, hypocrisy is hypocrisy .

gudpoynt 4 years, 1 month ago

maybe not NBC, but NPR did.

You know, part of that leftist media conspiracy.

They're doing their fall fund raiser now. Sinister. Absolutely sinister.

overthemoon 4 years, 1 month ago

This has been continuous news for MONTHs on MSNBC. If this is the first you've heard of it.....

Boston_Corbett 4 years, 1 month ago

In Minnesota, where the Palin-like congresswoman Melissa Bachman serves, and rails about Obama and socialism continuously, almost the exact script of Tom's, the local papers have found she requested stimulus funds Seven times.

http://www.startribune.com/politics/local/105192159.html

Boston_Corbett 4 years, 1 month ago

Tom just hates accurate information, that is why he hates the papers and the media.

And why his heroes Joe Wilson, Christine O'Donnell, and Sharron Angle spend full-time hiding from the media. .......Because if you run for a 6-year term as one of 100 US Senators, you really should not have to answer questions about your background or qualifications to the public, and instead depend upon millions of dollars from unknown sources to buy your way.

Boston_Corbett 4 years, 1 month ago

This comment was removed by the site staff for violation of the usage agreement.

phoggyjay 4 years, 1 month ago

This comment was removed by the site staff for violation of the usage agreement.

Boston_Corbett 4 years, 1 month ago

Obama hid from reporters like Wilson and O'Donnell? Hardly.

Your continual lies show you have no credibility.

yourworstnightmare 4 years, 1 month ago

"U.S. Rep. Lynn Jenkins, R-Topeka, wrote LaHood in favor of a project to spend money on improving freight rail lines, saying it was needed to help the Kansas economy."

Wait. I thought that stimulus spending did not help the economy. I'm so confused! Please, Rep. Jenkins, clear it up for us.

beatrice 4 years, 1 month ago

And it will be replaced with a facist congress, no doubt.

You really should look up Socialism in a dictionary Tom.

ivalueamerica 4 years, 1 month ago

Once again, you lie just to lie.

Living in South America, I know many socialists and by no definition of Socialism is the US Democratic Party Socialist.

It is just a soundbite you like using to be dramatic.

Like I told you before, dishonesty makes your contributions worthless to a civilized society and your honor is lost.

beatrice 4 years, 1 month ago

Republicans all across the country are doing this. If they are currently in office, they are including Stimulus funded programs as their major accomplishments while at the same time badmouthing the Stimulus package. It is hypocrisy, pure and simple.

I also have no doubt Democrats would do the same exact thing if the shoe was on the other foot. Politics is an ugly game.

jafs 4 years, 1 month ago

I think that's a terrible idea.

It would be a good idea, on the other hand, to specify how the post violated the TOS.

overthemoon 4 years, 1 month ago

What Is Fascism?

The word has been bandied about by so many people so wrongly for so long that, as Paxton points out, "Everybody is somebody else's fascist." Given that, I always like to start these conversations by revisiting Paxton's essential definition of the term:

     "Fascism is a system of political authority and social order intended to reinforce the unity, energy, and purity of communities in which liberal democracy stands accused of producing division and decline."

Elsewhere, he refines this further as:

     "a form of political behavior marked by obsessive preoccupation with community decline, humiliation or victimhood and by compensatory cults of unity, energy and purity, in which a mass-based party of committed nationalist militants, working in uneasy but effective collaboration with traditional elites, abandons democratic liberties and pursues with redemptive violence and without ethical or legal restraints goals of internal cleansing and external expansion."

Jonah Goldberg aside, that's a basic definition most legitimate scholars in the field can agree on, and the one I'll be referring to here.

if you want to read the rest:

http://www.truth-out.org/080909A

jafs 4 years, 1 month ago

Yes - it appears Tinky is a bit more intelligent than he/she generally pretends to be.

beatrice 4 years, 1 month ago

um, TW, the fascist comment was sarcastic, and socialism is not facism. Try a little harder not to be so simple.

JustNoticed 4 years, 1 month ago

Here we go again, gang. Something else to distract and divide us. Hey, look over here ... er, there ... no, there! Immigration, abortion, politicians at the trough! Terrorists! Voter fraud! Socialism! Never mind that the Kansas definition of Socialism includes only the USSR (oh god, don't let them look at Scandinavia).

By all means, let's all get our shorts in a twist over this crap and completely ignore how broken our system is. BROKEN, as in they all campaign in such a way as to divide us and get elected and then govern as their owners see fit. Their OWNERS, the Oligarchs who paid for them.

Can't you see them up there laughing at us being a bunch of snotty kids in the sandbox? No, wait, I don't think they'd be interested. They'd have a hired gun paying attention to make sure we stay on task.

Kontum1972 4 years, 1 month ago

like Lemmings too the sea...LoL...!

pork is good with bbq sauce

bd 4 years, 1 month ago

I am getting a little tired of this one sided liberal rag!

Tea anyone??????

Cait McKnelly 4 years, 1 month ago

Owned by Dolph Simon? Are you outta your mind?

monheim 4 years, 1 month ago

We're well into "play to your base" territory in politics right now. It doesn't matter what side we're talking about. Politicians are framing everything in black and white terms for their bases now, so they can get elected again. If they can galvanize their base by demonizing the spending bill, then you can bet that's exactly what they'll do. I agree it's hipocritical but hey...it is NOT unique to either party. It's easy to oppose something, take advantage of it anyway and use post-hoc justifications like the ones posted here to get away with it. That's how it is. It's politics.

overthemoon 4 years, 1 month ago

For everyone who thinks this is news, Rachel Maddow has been reporting on this for months. Not the sort of info you'd expect from fox news, of course, so many of you may have not heard about it.

The bottom line. Republican Congresspeople voted as a block against all stimulus measures. Then they proudly display their 'hard work' in bringing home jobs. They think no one will notice that they have tried to keep their 'principles' while taking credit for what the President and the democratic congress has put their bu tts on the line. Its cheap. Its transparently hypocritical. It would be so terrific if they would just get with the program, get their hands dirty and do whats needed to get our economy moving. Instead, they stay safely behind their worn out talking points and let the rest suffer the consequences of making unpopular but necessary decisions.

wmathews 4 years, 1 month ago

Users are able to flag anonymously because we want them to feel comfortable reporting comments they find offensive whether they are involved in the conversation or not. I don't see that element of the flagging process changing anytime soon.

jafs 4 years, 1 month ago

What about specifying how the posts have violated the TOS?

Or is any post that someone finds offensive removed?

Boston_Corbett 4 years, 1 month ago

Ms. Whitney Mathews,

I suggest the LJW to implement a "mute" function.

As was the case with he-whom-can-not-be named, and Cool et al, some people I would like to choose to eliminate from the stream of postings I read. Eliminating these would de-clutter my feeds, and allow me to read more forum threads. The posters I would chose to eliminate would include those from Tom and Merrill.

On the left, and on the right, if these people would understand that many people don't want to listen to their impolite styles, they would perhaps moderate and sharpen their debate, or they would lose most of their audience. HWCNBN and Tom did/will scream "censorship," but it is not. It really would be just imposing consumer choice into a free marketplace of ideas.

Thank you, Boston Corbett

fundamental 4 years, 1 month ago

What the heck is wrong with opposing a bill that is going to cost your constituents billions of dollars, but then making sure those same constituents benefit in some way from the inevitable passage of such a bill? Sounds perfectly reasonable to me.

Think of it this way. Let's say you are part of a committee planning an event, which will cost all attendees $5. Virtually everyone on the committee agrees that food should be served at the event. You recommend the committee purchase pizza to feed everyone, since you believe that will be the most cost-effective way to provide food for everyone who comes to the event. In addition, you've heard from several attendees that pizza is what they would prefer. Well, a majority of the members of the party committee think they should serve Chick-Fil-A instead. Now, everyone agrees that Chick-Fil-A is tasty, but it's much more expensive, and would not accomplish the goal of the food (that is, satisfying the attendees' hunger) any better than would the pizza. But, seeing you are outnumbered on the committee, you are faced with a couple of options.

  1. You could, based on your principled opposition to what you see as an unnecessary expenditure, refuse to accept any food on behalf of you or a proportional number of attendees. Thus, assuming a 60/40 split on the committee, 40% of the attendees would get no food, though all have paid the same admission fee.

  2. While still opposing the unnecessary expenditure, you lobby for both chicken nugget and chicken sandwich options, so as to make sure that all attendees are fed to their liking.

Now, between options 1 and 2, it seems perfectly reasonable that, finding one's self outnumbered, one would still seek to make sure all attendees receive at least some food for their admission fee. This is exactly what Moran, Tiahrt, Brownback, etc. have done. To have done otherwise would be the same as denying fee-paying even attendees food for which they have all paid.

overthemoon 4 years, 1 month ago

That would be reasonable, but in this analogy 'you' said NO FOOD, not pizza or carrot sticks or anything. And argued that there should be no cost to attendees, no chairs, no program.

Once the event was underway, 'you' stood up and took credit for all of the planning and then reached in and grabbed all the food you could get when it hit the table.

fundamental 4 years, 1 month ago

I don't recall too many Republicans (and none of the KS ones) saying "NO STIMULUS WHATSOEVER!!!" as you imply they did. Principled opposition to the kind of stimulus that was passed (a veritable grab-bag of liberal pet-projects, mixed in with a few worth-while not-so-shovel-ready projects) is not the same as saying "NO STIMULUS." Pretty much everyone agreed that something had to be done (hence, in my analogy, I said "virtually everyone . . . agrees that food should be served"), but how it was gone about was a matter of some contention.

Let's take it a step further, though. Let's say, at the event (using my analogy again), an attendee approaches you at or after the event and thanks you for providing the food they enjoyed, etc. I rather doubt anybody would use that moment to say, "well, I lobbied hard for pizza, but I'm glad you got something to eat anyway." No, your response would be more like, "You're welcome. I'm glad we were able to provide you with a tasty meal." There's nothing wrong with that. That's all they've done here, in my opinion.

overthemoon 4 years, 1 month ago

It would be a better response to say "I'll be sure the food organizers know you liked it, they worked hard to get it all done" and then publicly give credit where it is due instead of walking around the room telling everyone that the committee should be fired.

fundamental 4 years, 1 month ago

Well, then it should be okay to tell them that, when the attendees receive a bill for cost overruns in a few months or years, it will be because the majority on the committee decided to spend more than what was necessary. I don't think there's anything wrong with saying "I'm glad you got something out of this in the short term, but darn it, because these other folks wanted to spend more than was necessary, it's gonna end up costing you more in the end."

I think that's essentially what's going on here.

overthemoon 4 years, 1 month ago

No. Its just the opposite. doing too little now will cost MORE in the long run.

fundamental 4 years, 1 month ago

Well, that's very much a point for debate. I suppose reasonable people can disagree on whether adding to the national debt is more damaging to our future than going through a slightly-longer recession. But that's for another post, I'm afraid.

Jimo 4 years, 1 month ago

The point is not "I didn't want it but seeing that it's going to exist anyway ....."

The point is that these solicitation letters are clear that the reason these Republicans want the money is because (A) the money will improve the economy and (B) provide jobs.

They then proceed to the cameras and claim that (A) the money won't improve the economy (by some exception to the laws of nature) and (B) won't provide any jobs (despite the jobs that they obviously provide).

(Sort of like that bridge to nowhere that Palin supported before she didn't support.)

And then - if this lying hypocrisy wasn't enough - they claim that these two diametrically opposite positions aren't contradictory. (Much like many liars on this forum.)

fundamental 4 years, 1 month ago

It's not contradictory to say that $787 Billion couldn't have been spent in a different manner that would have better stimulated the economy while accepting some federal funding for projects that you know will, in fact, help the economy. Besides, it's not like Brownback or Moran or whomever could have written a letter to LaHood saying "this project won't add a single job and won't help the economy at all" because had he done so, the funding wouldn't have been granted. Sometimes you have to use the language of the opposition to make sure your own constituents don't get royally screwed. It's still not contradictory to get up and say that the stimulus would have worked better if it were fashioned differently, though.

Jimo 4 years, 1 month ago

Or you can just go with the simpler explanation - most politicians are fairly intelligent people and when they tell you things like "the stimulus created no jobs" or "creationism is a valid theory" or "tax cuts pay for themselves" they're relying on the chance that you aren't an intelligent person.

What you posit is that there was an alternate stimulus proposal (I guess from Republicans, who else?) that would have been more effective. I read the newspaper in some detail and I can't remember ANY such alternative offered.

Being that I'm not really a SciFi fan, let's leave the possibility of an alternate universe alone, shall we? The Democrats, to their shame and apparently electoral demise, wasted 40% of the stimulus, not on spending, but on tax cuts to a frightened and over-extended populace, who prompts pocketed the money or paid off debt - both worthy purposes IN THE LONG RUN but anti-stimulative in the short run.

Net, there is no stimulus at all, just less anti-stimulus than there would have been otherwise. Heck, state & local gov't fired over 100,000 workers in September alone! (Great, States are already borrowing from the Fed to cover unemployment checks.) Hence, the limited recovery (800,000+ jobs added so far in Obama's Presidency but hardly a dent in the 8,000,000 lost at the end of Bush's).

Sorry, but what is rational for an individual person or an individual firm can be irrational for the economy at large. This is the great insight of Keynesianism. Periods of economic weakness are no more a good time for governmental frugality than Stage 4 cancer is a prudent time for a serious weight loss program.

yourworstnightmare 4 years, 1 month ago

The Rep. Jenkins item bears repeating:

"U.S. Rep. Lynn Jenkins, R-Topeka, wrote LaHood in favor of a project to spend money on improving freight rail lines, saying it was needed to help the Kansas economy."

Get that last part? Help the Kansas economy? From what Rep. Jenkins has told us, the stimulus does not help the economy. Please Rep. Jenkins, clear this matter up for us.

The hypocrisy is not that those opposed to the stimulus sought funds from it. The ongoing hyppocrisy is that they lie and demagogue about the stimulus still, all the while having a nice pull off of the federal teat.

Jenkins, Moran, Brownback, Roberts, Tiahrt. Suckling from the federal teat AND hypocrits about it.

Tsk tsk tsk.

jafs 4 years, 1 month ago

How is it you can so completely miss the point?

If the stimulus program is helpful, then it is helpful. If it is not, then it is not.

Claiming that it is not, and then seeking it because it is makes no sense at all, especially if you then try to take credit for helping people with it, even though you opposed it and claimed it wouldn't help.

jafs 4 years, 1 month ago

Taking it is one thing.

Trying to get political fuel and credit for the help that it provides is another thing entirely.

Especially when one voted against it in the first place, claiming that it wouldn't help and was a bad idea.

yourworstnightmare 4 years, 1 month ago

Jenkins, Moran, Brownback, Roberts, and Tiahrt.

All having a nice big pull from the federal teat.

Soooooo-eeeeeeeey!

Richard Heckler 4 years, 1 month ago

Same with pork barrel spending across the board. Repubs constantly bitch about taxes yet spend them without batting an eye.

Earmarks are awful yet republicans never turn them away which makes them phoney.

Repubs constantly bitch about taxes yet never give up their big government check that which will follow them after retirement = tax dollar moochers till death do they part.

Campaigns go too long,spend way too much money and do not necessarily provide the best available. It is up to us to stop the nonsense at the voting booths. Replace 95% of all elected officials every 4 years for the house and every 6 years for the Senate.

Not voting sends the wrong message and changes nothing.

Lets’s demand a new system and vote in Fair Vote America : http://www.fairvote.org/irv/

Demand a change on the next ballot because you know our legislators will NOT change the corrupt campaign finance process.

The big money candidates are more beholden than ever to corporate special interests due to the very long nature of campaigns. How do they have time to do the job they were elected to do?

We need public financing of campaigns. Citizens cannot afford special interest money campaigns for it is the citizens that get left out. Let citizens vote on this issue. http://www.publicampaign.org/

In Addition:

Replace 95% of all elected officials every 4 years for the house and every 6 years for the Senate.

Ralph Nader says 90%. I say 95%!

Flap Doodle 4 years, 1 month ago

Where have we heard all this before? Oh, of course, right on this very forum. This one's been out of the heavy rotation for a while, though.

Richard Heckler 4 years, 1 month ago

Repubs bitch about the high cost of medicare yet forgot to prosecute one of their own so conveniently.

What sends medicare expenses through the roof sometimes?

Flag waving Republican criminals such as the Sen Bill Frist family = HCA Inc defrauds Medicaid, Medicare and Tricare (the federal program that covers the military and their families)

"What did HCA do? It inflated its expenses and billed the government for the overrun; it billed the government for services ineligible for reimbursement (like advertising and marketing costs). HCA violated both law and medical ethics when, as Forbes put it, "the company increased Medicare billings by exaggerating the seriousness of the illnesses they were treating.

It also granted doctors partnerships in a company hospitals as a kickback for the doctors' referring patients to HCA. In addition, it gave doctors 'loans' that were never expected to be paid back, free rent, free office furniture -- and free drugs from hospital pharmacies."

This is the ethical climate that reigned in the Frist family's money machine. In an unguarded moment, Senator Frist told the Boston Globe that conversations with his doctor father about the family calling were like "benign versions of the Godfather and Michael Corleone."

Apparently the senator considers defrauding the government "benign." So too does the Bush White House, which dictated the Justice Department deal with HCA that let the crooks escape jail just as Frist was being anointed the Senate's majority leader. A pure coincidence in timing, of course."

http://www.consumerwatchdog.org/patients/articles/?storyId=17490

http://www.laweekly.com/2003-01-16/news/the-bad-doctor/

jafs 4 years, 1 month ago

To be fair, the government did collect $1.7 billion in fines from HCA.

Richard Heckler 4 years, 1 month ago

Why are republican so opposed to creating new jobs for the BUSHCO 11 million unemployed?

Do they not understand that jobs would get the economy going again? Or is this what they are afraid of?

American Recovery and Reinvestment Act = jobs jobs jobs jobs jobs to help sustain American families.

Sue McDaniel 4 years, 1 month ago

Once the bill was passed they might as well try to help their people back home...that's a no brainer!

jafs 4 years, 1 month ago

Yes, but they shouldn't get any credit for doing so, if they voted against the bill.

And, you can't have it both ways - either the stimulus is helping or it's not. If it is, then they can't claim it's not and vote against it on that basis. If it's not, then they shouldn't be taking credit for any help it's providing.

Richard Heckler 4 years, 1 month ago

"Once the bill was passed they might as well try to help their people back home...that's a no brainer!"

Unless those republican voters back home wanted these not economic giants of our time to vote no and did not want those valuable tax dollars spent in their communities.

Maybe those repubs back home don't want jobs for the BUSHCO 11 million unemployed?

The repub no votes made zero sense considering the state of the economy by BUSHCO.

Cait McKnelly 4 years, 1 month ago

Look at the headline. Now look at me. Look at the headline. Now look at me. This is my shocked face.

George Lippencott 4 years, 1 month ago

Interesting propaganda piece. A while back I had a conversation with one of our elected officials in this group. The topic was “ear marks”. The individual was philosophically opposed to them but faced the dilemma that they were going to happen. Should their constituents be denied a piece of the inevitable or should one stand on principle? I wonder how many of you caterwauling about the stimulus which IMHO is in many ways just a bid set of “ear marks” would address such a moral dilemma.

Didn’t the left just bash the USCOC because they accept money from multi-nationals and therefore in the definition of the left they are accepting foreign donations. Then comes the SEIU who also gets financial inputs from people who are not US citizens. We did not hear much about that. We will never get to civility with double standards.

Of course the flip side of this is that I guess Democrats believe in “ear marks” for their favored constituencies such as teachers and unions. Must be their form of trickle down. If we keep teachers the local tax payers can not afford they will be spending that largess to create jobs for the “little people” who are not deemed worthy of direct support or maybe even a reduction in their taxes so they can spend it and create jobs.

jafs 4 years, 1 month ago

It absolutely would be a dilemma if one is opposed to earmarks, but is committed to representing one's constituents.

overthemoon 4 years, 1 month ago

Maybe this will clarify the issue. Its not standard issue hypocrisy, its a convoluted argument that denies and proclaims simultaneously. From the Washington Monthly.

"GOP lawmakers, all of whom rejected and tried to kill the Recovery Act, continue to tell the media and Tea Party zealots that government spending is a disaster. The Republican line is (a) stimulus spending didn't work; and (b) stimulus spending is literally incapable of working.

But when several dozen congressional Republicans plead for additional government spending -- in order to help the economy -- the whole argument falls apart.

I'm well aware of the standard Republican reply to all of this -- the funds were going to be spent anyway, so these members figured they might as well seek some resources for their own constituents.

But that's not only wrong; it misses the point. The correspondence these Republicans sent to the Obama administration makes the entire GOP talking point look demonstrably ridiculous precisely because they explicitly argue that the requested stimulus funds would create jobs.

In other words, Republicans have argued that the Recovery Act can't create jobs, won't create jobs, hasn't created jobs, will create jobs, and has created jobs -- all at the same time.

If these GOP officials believed their own rhetoric, this would be impossible, suggesting they couldn't possibly mean what they say. Indeed, we have the written requests for stimulus funds to prove that even Republicans think the stimulus is good policy."

Flap Doodle 4 years, 1 month ago

If Uncle Sugar is handing out free $, why not ask for some?

puddleglum 4 years, 1 month ago

uncle sugar.... you mean that rolling stone's song?

George Lippencott 4 years, 1 month ago

overthemoon (anonymous) says…

OK. I have missed the GOP "talking point" that the stimulus has created no jobs. We know that it at least saved jobs - even if temporarily. My points are.

It will take a while to sort the contribution of the stimulus. We all know it did not solve the unemployment problem - yet. It may have avoided worse or it may even have contributed to the problem. Time will tell. My understanding if the GOP side reflects the point that the stimulus did not reverse the unemployment (at least not yet) not that it created/saved no jobs

The issue of seeking goodies for Kansas and the point you are making about jobs are two different things IMHO. You are mixing them and IMHO the purpose is political advantage and not civic enlightment. The stimulus as marketed by the administration is to help people. The GOP did not believe it was worth the cost and fought it. Thay lost. Now they are allowing it to help Kansans. That is bad???

yourworstnightmare 4 years, 1 month ago

The GOP hypocrisy is not that they voted against the stimulus but are now lining up at the trough.

The hypocrisy is that they lie about the stimulus by saying it does not create jobs and help the economy and then say the exact opposite in their entreaties for stimulus money.

Which is it, Rep. Jenkins et al.? Is the stimulus a waste of money that does not help the economy, or is it an economic boon? Which is the lie you are telling?

That is the hypocrisy.

jafs 4 years, 1 month ago

The question is whether it's helping or not.

If it is, then the Republicans should give credit to the Democrats since they voted against it, or at the very least not campaign on all of the help it's providing to their constituents.

If it isn't, then they shouldn't be seeking it, since it wouldn't help anyone anyway.

yourworstnightmare 4 years, 1 month ago

Do not claim what you just exuded as being by my logic.

Flap Doodle 4 years, 1 month ago

Relax and have a popsicle, nightie. A cool and fruity treat will help you get over the midterm disaster that's about to swamp the followers of the current regime.

beatrice 4 years, 1 month ago

I love to see all the defenders of blatant hypocrisy. More anti-American statements from the party over country bunch. Sad and pathetic.

jayhawklawrence 4 years, 1 month ago

Liars lie and politicians are liars.

What is there to learn from this?

Tax dollars are like Heroin for politicians.

We have to figure out a way to take the drug away from them so they won't be tempted. Congress today is just a bunch of addicts looking for their next fix and they will rob you to get it.

yourworstnightmare 4 years, 1 month ago

So you won't be voting for Moran, Tiahrt, Jenkins or Brownback in a few weeks, then?

jafs 4 years, 1 month ago

I'd suggest you focus more on the content of the article than the reporter.

beatrice 4 years, 1 month ago

Tom, it is only going to be a "bad day" to fools who hate the idea of American elections ... you know, people just like you. If Republicans take the majority in the House, then hopefully they will stop just being the Party of NO. They will be held accountable for their actions. Nothing wrong with some checks and balances if it is for the good of the nation.

I just hope a few teabaggers get elected, because they will be in the press a lot and they really make Republicans look bad, even if they aren't witches.

jayhawklawrence 4 years, 1 month ago

As an American citizen, we are supposed to vote.

It is going to be a very tough decision.

Voting for a Republican is liking being asked to drink my urine.

But I lean conservative on financial matters and unfortunately, there are not a lot of Conservative Democrats to vote for.

I knew somebody that always voted in such as way as to prevent one party from having too much power. He believed in using the system of checks and balances that is within our system to prevent the abuse of power. It did not matter what party. I think there is some wisdom in that idea, but as we have seen, our government is using power more and more that it is not supposed to be able to use. The system is being abused by politicians that are supposed to respect the law, but we have lawyers turning into politicians that don't hold that point of view anymore.

They are the type of pragmatists who believe in short term gains without realizing the long term consequences and consider themselves too clever for the rest of us.

The great thing about midwest values is that they are simple. Complicated does not mean better or smarter. We have to get back to simple values and ideals that have stood the test of time and once made people all over the world dream of coming to America.

That is what I believe.

jafs 4 years, 1 month ago

Republicans have not shown themselves to be fiscally conservative for quite a while. The highest deficits in the last 40 years were during Reagan's presidency.

It's difficult to vote and feel good about it, given the flaws on both sides of the aisle.

camper 4 years, 1 month ago

This article is like a snapshot of the times we are now living in. Very troubling. Almost like there is a touch of evil behind this blatant hypocrisy.

And politicians are not the only ones who do this. Some of the loudest hardliners I know are ones who rally against so-called Socialisim yet get right in line for a handout. From my retired uncle who has a vacation home in Florida and a six figure annual pension for the rest of his life.....who is now also collecting unemployment because he was laid off from his "retirement" job. Friends who collect disability and medicaid.....yet are staunchly agains "Obamacare".

How can I say how troubling this is if it is a reflection on us. I believe we are better than this. We can help one another, but also let good governance provide a fair safety net for our needs as a society.

This latest news is the most blatant form of hypocrisy I've seen in some time.

overthemoon 4 years, 1 month ago

Perhaps you can start us of by showing respect for your fellow community members and for the President of this country we all share...and for community organizers who embody the very core of our democratic nation by providing the means for communities of all kinds the opportunity to be heard. (the NRA is active in community organizing, ya know. as are churches, the boy scouts, and any number of organizations that represent a community of shared interests, problems, or ambitions. And then you can lay off words like 'regime' and 'socialist' and all of the other hot buttons that have no meaning and only fuel anger and distrust.

Ok? You go first.

pace 4 years, 1 month ago

The stimulus money kept this country from going into a depression. The stimulus money to bail wall street was mainly passed when President Bush was in power. The hypocrites have no problem spending billions to blame Obama for the economic crisis. Talk about spending money and not helping working families. Where does all the ad money come from? Special little groups. The saddest thing is people believe ads and lies and don't care enough to think. They feel so bad. No ads saying what they plan to do. They don't seem to have a problem claiming we don't have money to support education or health reform. There doesn't seem to be connection to cutting education to people (real stupid long range plan that) and how that is to translate to improving employment. The trickle down theory seems a bit dry.

notajayhawk 4 years, 1 month ago

Ah, I'm so glad I came late to this one. I'm not going to bother reading all the posts, I scanned it enough to see that the usual BDS sufferers are foaming at the mouth whining about "blatant hypocrisy" and similar garbage.

I'm reasonably sure this has already been said (at least I hope someone else had the common sense to say it already), but if the Democrats forced through a spending bill that Kansan's are going to have to pay for, it would have been dereliction of the worst sort NOT to try to get some of our money back. As a matter of fact, speaking of "blatant hypocrisy", I seem to recall many of those same kool-aid drinkers whining up a storm that the same Republicans named above should have voted for the stimulus precisely so that they could have gotten some money spent here.

But I expect that kind of hypocrisy from the Larryville libs. All they can do is whine, since they know nothing is going to stop any of the elected officials' offices from being filled by Republican after Republican for some time to come.

overthemoon 4 years, 1 month ago

you miss the point. this is NOT about asking for money for local use.

The question is: How can a legislator say that the stimulus 'isn't working' and then immediately say, within minutes, that the stimulus money is providing jobs and important projects in their district? The two statements are in direct contradiction to one another. The money is either working or it isn't. To claim that the stimulus is evil and horrid and that those who voted for it are bad bad people and then to claim credit for the benefits just doesn't make sense.

pace 4 years, 1 month ago

ho ho ho, I won't read what people say, I will imagine it and then just call names Tea party?

BigAl 4 years, 1 month ago

I find it amazing that when the Republicans get caught with their hand in the cookie jar, they blame the so-called liberal media. It reminds me of the time when Sarah Palin couldn't handle an interview with Katie Couric, it somehow was Couric's fault.

Typical republican reaction: Hate, fear and division.

George Lippencott 4 years, 1 month ago

Sure a lot of ideologically ranting on here! Just exactly what are we ranting about - elected officials who opposed government largess but then passed it on to us when they failed to block it. Sounds rational and responsible to me!!

Commenting has been disabled for this item.