The Lynn Jenkins campaign has attacked Nancy Boyda for her vote yesterday on a comprimise "Drill baby, drill!" bill.
But wait, I thought Lynn wanted to drill? She would support this bill too then, right?
“I cannot tell you specifically the bill she would or would not have voted for since Lynn's not in Congress, but what I sent you before is the criteria she would follow,” said Josh Hersh in an e-mail to the Lawrence Journal-World.
Oh, I see. You're willing to criticize others for voting for the bill, but not willing to say you would've voted against it. Brilliant.
Hersh did say that Jenkins would vote for a similar bill, as long as it was a compromise.
“Lynn would have voted for a compromise, bipartisan bill that was crafted by Republicans and Democrats. She would not have supported a political gimmick that's been declared dead on arrival by a Democrat senator.”
But this bill IS a compromise!
The original bill called for allowing drilling 100 miles off the coast. Republicans wanted 25, so the bill was amended to 50. If this isn't compromise, I don't know what is.
Another day, another example: Lynn Jenkins is Jim Ryun 2.0. (Like upgrading from Windows XP to Windows Vista, sure it's an upgrade, but is it really any better?)
Remember when the DCCC dropped some money into the Kansas 2nd and Christian Morgan and Lynn Jenkins got their panties in a bunch, blaming Boyda even though she has no control over who spends money on her race?
Well, Boyda proved her independence by telling the DCCC to get out of her race - and they decided to listen.
So one would think that Jenkins, in her quixotic effort to bring about "new Republican leadership," would do the same when the national Republicans dropped money into her race.
“It’s free speech,” Jenkins said. “Let anybody come tell their story and let the voters sort it out.”
Now, the NRCC has announced that they're going to spend $580,000 on ads in Kansas during the final two weeks of the election. (See here, here and here)
Who does Lynn Jenkins think she is?! She's screaming "foul" and playing dirty at the same time!
Jenkins is trying to trick us, but she's the same old politician with the same old Washington buddies who spend the same old K Street dollars so they can pull the puppet strings come January.
As seen on Boyda Bloc and Swing State Project, a Survey USA poll commissioned by the Washington D.C. newspaper Roll Call shows Nancy Boyda beating Lynn Jenkins, CPA 50-43.
We'd like to dig a little deeper into some of the cross tabs of this poll.
1) The poll posed the question "If two candidates were running for Congress, and one says that offshore drilling is the best way to solve America's energy problems ... and the other says that America needs to identify and promote alternative sources of energy ... which candidate would you vote for?" and 56% of the people chose the candidate who wanted to identify and promote alternative resources. Once again, Kansas Republicans are on the wrong side of an issue.
2) McCain is beating Obama pretty handily, but not keeping pace even with George Bush's 2004 performance. We've said on this blog before, in all likelihood McCain will win Kansas, but if he wins it with 50-55%, that 5-10% drop could send people like Jim Slattery and Donald Betts to Washington.
3) 46% of voters have a favorable opinion of Nancy Boyda compared to only 36% of voters who have a favorable opinion of Lynn Jenkins. A staggering 45% of voters have either a neutral opinion of Lynn Jenkins or they just flat out don't know who the hell she is. Given the fact that she has been elected to statewide office twice and just won a pretty contested and well-covered primary, this ain't so good for Jenky.
4) Remember how Lynn Jenkins is so "moderate" and Nancy Boyda is so "liberal"? Well, among self-identified moderates, Nancy Boyda is winning 47%-42%. Conservatives side with Lynn 85% of the time. Only 28% of moderates have a favorable opinion of Lynn Jenkins. Don't worry Lynn, you've got George Bush coming to town...
5) The poll shows Kansans have a 36% approval rating of George W Bush, slightly higher than the national average, but pretty abysmal for a "deep red" state. Bush's approval rating among moderates? 24%.
6) Though the Ryun/Jenkins primary didn't feature the kind of fireworks many thought it would, it is clear there have been some lingering affects. Jenkins garners the support of a mere 70% of Republicans, compared to 88% of Democrats supporting Nancy Boyda.
In the end, it's hard to find any positives for Jenkins in this poll. Yes, she's only 7% down, but with this data unless she changes her strategy some (see Bush, drilling) you have to think she's pretty much at her ceiling. Her best hope is that some of the right-wingers will come to realize she is one of them, and Bush swooping in should help in that regard, but Jim Ryun can tell you how that worked for him in 2006.
The poll was conducted August 19-21 and includes 620 likely voters. It has a margin of error of +/- 4%
Normally, we don't like to blame things on the media. Reminds us too much of Phill Kline, however, a few things have begun to bother us about the local media's coverage of the 2nd District race.
First, without any real reason, Lynn Jenkins has been anointed a moderate. Tell me, on what issue is Lynn Jenkins moderate? Just because she isn't as conservative as Jim Ryun, who was ranked the MOST conservative member of Congress by the National Journal.
Does that mean folks like Duncan Hunter and Tom DeLay are moderates too? They were in the House at the same time as Jimmy, so apparently since they're less conservative than he is, they're moderates.
Of course they're not, and neither is Lynn Jenkins. I challenge any Jenkins supporter reading this blog to post in the comment section ONE ISSUE on which Lynn Jenkins could truly be considered a moderate.
People call her pro-choice, but in reality she supports exceptions for rape, incest and life of the mother. You know, like EVERYONE ELSE WHO ISN'T COMPLETELY INSANE.
In reality, as Blue Tide Rising and Boyda Bloc have both correctly pointed out, and Lynn has even stated herself, Ryun and Jenkins have just about the same positions on nearly every meaningful topic.
Both want to deport everyone with a hint of brown in their skin. Both want to make the irresponsible Bush tax cuts for the super-rich permanent. Both refuse any kind of meaningful withdrawal from Iraq until we "win," whatever that means.
Beyond that though, the media seems to be obsessed with Lynn's victory in the primary. Understandably, it was a major upset and Lynn and her campaign deserve some credit for getting the job done.
But let's be honest here, Lynn Jenkins did not win that primary so much as Jim Ryun lost it. She still has a major name recognition problem. Jim Ryun was just SO BAD during his 10 years in Congress, Republican primary voters just wanted him to go away. This isn't a sign of some major shift to the center in Republican primary voters (remember, Lynn is still a conservative) it just means they're sick of Jim Ryun.
First and foremost, we want to apologize for our absence the last 13 days. We know you all have been jonesing for some LBK, and we apologize for leaving your fix unfulfilled. No excuses, we'll be better, we promise.
Now, to the business at hand.
If you watched 2nd District Congressional debate the other night, I think you'll agree that Lynn Jenkins scored some pretty solid points on the issues, but as time passes from the debate, the consensus seems to be that she came off as condescending, rude and even annoying.
It's not just that annoying voice of hers. Anyone who has followed this race already knows about that, but her body language, including touching Jim's shoulder as she talked about him like he was a wayward child.
Then, about half way through, she called him BABE! She was telling him it was his (read: Congress') fault she was forced to raise taxes 12 times in the Kansas Legislature.
We were at your mercy, babe.
What the hell?
Jenkins campaign manager Patrick Leopold said that Jenkins says it all the time and meant no harm by it. Honestly, that wouldn't surprise me, but in the world of politics, perception is more important than reality. Jenkins won the debate on the substance, but her shrill, condescending tone and body language may have created a likability issue for her.
Jim Ryun on the other hand, came off as the wounded little boy being picked on by the meanie Lynn Jenkins. Anyone who knows the tactics Jim Ryun has exercised in the past knows that he is anything but, but that doesn't matter.
This isn't the first time she has done this either. At a recent campaign event, she inferred that a trained monkey could do Jim Ryun's job in Congress as well as he did. Not that we disagree, but seriously, that's hard core.
If you'd like to weigh in on Babegate, click here.
Jim Ryun and Lynn Jenkins and even the press have been arguing on the campaign trail that the majority of voters in the 2nd District consider themselves conservative. I haven't seen any polling to back this up, so I thought I'd take a look at the official polls - elections.
Obviously, the 2nd District would not be called "liberal." It went over 60% to George W. Bush in both 2000 and 2004, but having lived in the 2nd District all my life, I question the argument that it is "Conservative."
First, let's examine how the district is represented in the Kansas Legislature. Of the 43 seats that lie either in whole or in part in the 2nd District, 22 are held by Democrats compared to 21 Republican-held seats.
State House and Senate seats are divided proportionately based on population, so that means the majority of the voters in the 2nd District are represented by at least one Democrat in the Kansas Legislature.
Admittedly however, the further down the ticket you go, the less significance party affiliation holds, so let's look at the 2nd District seat itself.
In the past 20 elections, Democrats have won the seat 11 times, Republicans have won it nine times. Republicans not named Jim Ryun or Sam Brownback have won the seat only three times.
To me, with the exception of Presidential races (which is more up for grabs this year than it has been in decades) the district is decidedly not liberal or conservative, but rather straight down the middle of the road.
So the next time you hear Lynn Jenkins or Jim Ryun call this a conservative district, remember, the facts don't back up that claim.
If you're interested in right-wing conspiracy theorist nutjobs and their blogs, I highly suggest Jim Ryun's son Ned's blog. He's no Brian Brown, but sometimes I think he figures the best contribution he can make to his father's campaign is proving that Jim isn't the crazy one in the family.
BoydaBloc yesterday had a humorous bit about Ned lamenting people who just can't keep themselves out of the limelight (like his dad), and now we have this.
Why don’t you (GOP members of Congress) police yourself better so that the Foleys and Cunninghams don’t get hung around every members neck?
A fair sentiment, but perhaps this "policing" should include keeping ideologues like Jim Ryun out of Congress. After all, Foley was legitimately hung around Jim's neck in 2006 after it came out that the two were neighbors on D Street (remember, the sweetheart townhouse that Jim still calls home) and even held a joint fund raiser in May 2006.
Rep. Jim Ryun (R-Kan.) was a late addition to the block party, dishing out coffee and black-and-white mousse cake to complete the guests’ culinary journey. Ryun’s wife, Anne, and son Ned stayed away from pricey planners to give the night a touch of the congressman’s folksy charm, including red- and blue-frosted elephant cookies handmade by a constituent.
“It’s very warm and inviting to have people into your home rather than in a public meeting place,” Anne Ryun said. “Among the congressional families, we do a lot of getting together among ourselves.”
Though Ryun's campaign first attempted to distance themselves from the pedophile Foley, they would later change their tune.
You know what though, crazy as he is, we can't help but agree with Ned on this one. We also wish the GOP leadership in Washington would keep better watch of the flock. But re-electing Jim Ryun would be putting fox in charge of the hen house.
Remember when Republicans were the party of fiscal responsibility. Somewhere in the past decade or so they decided that it would be easier to just CLAIM to be fiscally responsible, but not actually, you know, do it.
We thought that was going to be part of Lynn Jenkins' campaign in the primary against Jim Ryun. You know the, "If ever there was a time to send a CPA to Washington..." line. Well, apparently she's decided she can't win by actually being fiscally responsible, because that takes a lot of work and requires sacrifices that you just don't have to make when you can simply lie about it.
(Dear TKR and SRK, the above letters in the pretty colors with the funny line underneath them, that's called a "citation" Readers can click on it to see independent confirmation of the claims being made)
Jim Ryun, Lynn Jenkins and Nick Jordan — all Republicans trying to unseat two Democratic congressional incumbents who represent Lawrence — say the Democrats voted for the largest tax increase in the history of the United States.
(OK boys and girls, the above lines with the messed up margins, those are called "block quotes." This is another method of providing verification and credibility to one's argument)
Zing. One point for the radical right. But wait, there's more. It turns out that their statement, powerful though it may be, is...how should we say this...not true.
On that day, the House on a 212-207 vote approved a budget resolution, which Boyda and Moore supported. No Republicans voted for it.
The bill title was: “Revising the congressional budget for the United States government for fiscal year 2008, establishing the congressional budget for the United States government for fiscal year 2009, and setting forth appropriate budgetary levels for fiscal years 2010 through 2013.”
You see, the bill didn't actually do a damn thing to the tax code. So how, pray tell, can you carry out the largest tax increase in the history of the universe without making a single change to the tax code? The answer: you can't.
Sure, Reps. Moore and Boyda, along with other Democrats who are actually fiscally responsible, are willing to let some tax increases on the wealthiest Americans expire, because it was unwise fiscal policy in the first place. (Sorry billionaire oil tycoons, you may only be able to buy one Rolls Royce this year)
But the Republicans don't stop the lying train here. No sir. There are more lies to be told.
In his speech at Americans for Prosperity, Jim Ryun painted a horrifying picture of what might happen when all of the middle class tax cuts are destroyed by the above mentioned vote.
Just one problem, the resolution in question seeks to PRESERVE those tax cuts.
In a speech before the anti-tax group Americans for Prosperity, Ryun said the resolution that Boyda voted for will increase the taxes on millions of Americans, including many in the middle class.
But the resolution also includes policy language that calls for middle income tax relief, including extension of the increase in the child tax credit, relief from the so-called marriage penalty, and other deductions aimed at the middle class.
“Nancy has always believed that the middle class relief should be made permanent,” said her spokesman Thomas Seay. He said the sunset clauses in Bush’s plan don’t take effect until 2011. “Nancy has said again and again that when this issue reaches a vote, she’ll support extending middle class tax relief,” Seay said.
Oh right...the facts again. (NOTE: TKR and SRK...facts are things that are verifiable accurate. In addition to citations and block quotes, you should consider adding these to your blogs as well.)
Don't believe a politician on either side? I don't blame you. But typically you can trust the non-partisan research institutes. Not Center for American Progress or Americans for Prosperity, the actual research organizations that care about...research.
The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities says the budget resolution contains no tax increase, let alone the largest in U.S. history.
The resolution approved by the House assumed that the nation’s tax law would be amended to extend some of the expiring tax cuts, especially those affecting middle class families, according to the center, which is a nonpartisan group that works on policies and programs that affect low- and moderate-income families. The costs of those tax cuts would be offset by other changes in policy, which could include eliminating the tax cuts for the very wealthy, some Democrats have argued.
Of the allegations made by the Republicans, Aviva Aron-Dine, a policy analyst with the center, said, “Our view is that that claim is inaccurate.”
She added, “The language of tax increases is very powerful. It’s important to correct the record.”
Time and time again, I find myself think "Stephen Colbert was right." The truth really does have a liberal bias.
In a story that has been slowly simmering for the past few months, Lynn Jenkins is beginning to take some more heat over the American Century ads bearing her smiling mug. After the first bit of controversy started when Ric Anderson of the Topeka Capital-Journal and Steve Kraske of the Kansas City Star both wrote pieces criticizing, for different reasons, Jenkins' role in the advertising campaign. (The Star has taken the above-mentioned stories off their web site)
In typical amateur fashion. the Jenkins camp flew off the handle, ultimately culminating in this defensive guest column in the Kansas City Star in which she claimed that her presence in these advertisements was at the request of American Century and based on "extensive research" which showed that her face makes the ads all the more effective.
However, when pressed to provide such research, all the Treasurer's office could come up with was a power point slide with this ambiguous, unattributed quote.
"They see it's from Lynn Jenkins and it's professionally done and that impresses people and carries a lot of weight."
Really, it doesn't matter, at least according to the Federal Election Commission.
Sure, when the ads ran at the end of 2006, right before her 2nd election for State Treasurer, we kind of rolled our eyes and said "How convenient."
Now, as a candidate for Congress, Jenkins is subject to FEC regulations. and since these ads are paid for by American Century, it doesn't matter if she makes them more effective or if she had no idea they might benefit her politically. The fact is they do benefit her politically, which constitutes an in-kind contribution from a corporation, which is illegal in elections for Federal office.
Is it her responsibility as State Treasurer to promote this 529 program personally? Ya, probably. But it's also her responsibility as a candidate for Congress to adhere to all laws and regulations set forth by the relevant governing bodies.
Something has to give. This isn't just a matter of her election being a distraction from her duties or causing a time crunch, we are to the point where her responsibilities as State Treasurer are leading to violations of FEC regs. Lynn needs to decide if she's the Kansas State Treasurer or if she's a candidate for Congress. She just can't do both anymore.
Sometimes I find myself daydreaming about the drubbing the KS GOP received from Democrats in the 2006 election cycle and wondering "How the Hell did we Democrats do so well in a state where the registration numbers say we should get our clocks cleaned every year?"
Well, I think the majority of the reason is Democrats have a vastly superior organization on the ground and some great candidates. But there is something else that sometimes I have trouble putting my finger on. And then I get another email from Christian Morgan and it all comes back to me. Let's break down the latest (sent at 10:51 on a Friday night...I bet that got a lot of play, Christian!)
Democrat Week in Review
Say it with me now...Democratic...Democratic. Democrat is a noun, Democratic is the adjective. It's hard to take you seriously when your grammar is so piss-poor.
In case you missed it, here are a couple of highlights from the last week.
Kathleen Sebelius
In her continuing attempts to use Kansas as a stepping stone for her national political ambitions, the Governor was in New York this week discussing the Republican led legislature's ideas on reducing crime and recidivism rates in the state—while the Legislature was hard at work trying to undo her rejection of the most substantial job growth opportunity for Western Kansas in the last decade.
Of course, all of our kids will have emphysema, but by God their grandfathers would have been given a chance to work construction on a power plant (of course, chances are those jobs would've gone to out of state skilled laborers, but that's neither here nor there.)
While she was gone, she also managed ignore the hard work of House and Senate Republicans by taking credit for Kansas being one of the "Pollina Corporate Top 10 Pro-Business States."
We can't help but wonder if the authors of StayRedKansas and the authors of this email share the same brain waves. Much like StayRed, good ol' Christian didn't feel the need to cite (or apparently read) the study he mentions. We'll help. See here or here. The author of the study said the results reflected a commitment from the Governor's office to business friendly practices. We'll give the legislature credit for the criminally-low minimum wage in Kansas, though.
But we were quick to point out that it's because of the Republican legislature passing pro-business tax credits, economic growth incentives, and tax cuts that make Kansas such a business friendly state. The Governor seemed to forget that she stood in the way of these policies by proposing tax increases, socialized medicine, and rejecting job growth proposals.
Yes, because most businesses our against providing free health care to children under 5. Which, by the way, Susan Wagle is now all for. Too bad she waited until after George W McCain...er...Bush...made sure there was no money to fund her new-found pet project.
Nancy Boyda
There seems to be a disconnect between the freshman Democrat's rhetoric and her actions in Washington. A few weeks ago, she made a big splash in the press about how she was not going to use auto-dial calls during her campaign. A few days later, residents across the 2nd District received an auto-dial message from Boyda's office. While she didn't specify that she wouldn't auto-dial from her official office, we find this just another case of Boyda not following through on her promises to the people of the 2nd District.
I'm not a big fan of robocalls, but a robocall from Nancy Boyda's office asking me what I think would be more than I (or anyone else) ever got from Jim Ryun, and he was in office for 10 years. If she wasn't conducting these surveys, this space would be used to criticize her for not being in touch with her district.
Speaking of not following through, Boyda made earmarks a major campaign issue in 2006, but has repeatedly failed to live up to her end of the bargain. She stated, "The earmark process has been abused in the past. Members of Congress have set aside funds for programs that turned out to personally benefit them." Yet this year, she has submitted $48 million in special earmark requests; we'll leave it to your good judgment whether her millions in earmarks "personally benefit" Mrs. Boyda.
Thankfully, change is coming to Washington and you can be a part of it. Click here to contribute to the KS GOP and help us keep this liberal Democrat accountable.
Dennis Moore
Dennis is known for saying one thing in his district and voting the other way in Washington, DC. Most recently, he has been practicing this bad habit with two crucial pieces of legislation—FISA and the SAVE Act (immigration reform).
First, Dennis Moore promised to support a bipartisan Senate bill that would have protected those who helped protect America after 9/11 but then voted with Nancy Pelosi to block this bipartisan legislation and passed a bill that not only fails to protect those who have helped America fight terrorists but allows for a massive pay off to powerful special interests like the trial Lawyers.
The Wall Street Journal recently highlighted Moore's double-cross on this important issue. To read the whole story click here.
Wow, after Nancy Boyda shoved this argument where the sun don't shine, they've moved on to Dennis Moore. Well guess what, the facts don't change regardless of who is on the receiving end of your baseless attacks. See this factcheck piece in Newsweek.
And then there is immigration reform. Moore states that he supports "...strong reforms that will improve our border security and make our immigration policies more realistic, enforceable, and complimentary to the global economy we live in...." however, he is standing in the way of meaningful reform by blocking the SAVE Act (Secure America with Verification and Enforcement) which would improve border security and boost immigration law enforcement.
It is clear that Dennis Moore has become part of the broken system in Washington that is failing us. It is time for a change.
I wonder why they haven't attacked Nancy Boyda on immigration...oh right, it's because she's already done more to address the issue than Jim Ryun managed in his entire 10 years in Congress. Although, I think I've done more to combat illegal immigration since I started writing this post than Jim Ryun ever did. Look, the fact of the matter is that Nick Jordan is a massive tool. Why they even bother wasting their time on this race is beyond me. Maybe it's just sour grapes on the part of Kris Kobach since Dennis Moore trounced him by double figures.
Apparently though, they have nothing to say in support of Todd Tiahrt or Pat Roberts.
Since they're using these lies and fabrications as a fundraising tool, lets hit'm right back. Below are the web sites for our federal candidates. Support them in any way you can, whether it's volunteering, donating $5 or donating $2,300. We've done well in 2006 and our situation is looking pretty strong again, but we're always up against a staggering registration advantage, so complacency is not an option.
We've been on our friends at StayRedKansas and TheKansasRepublican a lot lately, trying to ascertain why, if they care so much about Kansas jobs, they haven't posted a single post regarding the disastrous decision to outsource a military contract to AirBus. You know, the one that John McCain tacitly endorsed while Sam Brownback, Pat Roberts and Todd Tiahrt twiddled their thumbs.
Well finally, after all of our efforts, TheKansasRepublican used the word Boeing in one of their posts. Fear not, they also talked about Holcomb and there were still plenty of sophomoric personal insults, so they're not ill or something.
While Tihart may have to fend off unwarranted accusations of the Boeing deal gone south, the facts will clearly prevent any of Betts’ mud from sticking. Few congressmen have delivered for their district the way Tihart has, and he maintains a large network of support throughout the 4th. The war in Iraq will certainly not ring the way it did against Republicans in 06, and Tihart has the warchest/ work ethic that will make the 4th nearly impossible to lose. Betts will need more than a few senate accomplishments and a kiss from "Kathy the cougar" to defeat "Todd the god."
Naturally, they didn't provide any evidence for why the accusations against Tiahrt are unfounded. It's possible they're just lazy, but our best guess is they don't have any. If you'd like so more intelligent analysis (with citations even!!!), see here, here, here and here. See also here.
More than just a weak defense of the Boeing deal, their argument for why Tiahrt will crush Sen. Donald Betts is that Tiahrt brings home the bacon from his powerful seat on the House Appropriations Committee.
This we cannot argue with. Todd Tiahrt loves him some earmarks. But this very same blog, in the post immediately prior to this one, criticizes Nancy Boyda for using earmarks for such wasteful things as equipment for local law enforcement and water treatment plants.
So Wyatt, Carrie, Doc, Custer, Wild Bill and all the rest, tell us, why is bringing home the bacon a reason to re-elect Todd Tiahrt in the 4th District, but grounds to toss out Nancy Boyda in the 2nd? Is there something about Todd Tiahrt's earmarks that is somehow more justifiable than Nancy Boyda's or even Dennis Moore's?
On the campaign trail, Republicans Lynn Jenkins and Jim Ryun are misleading voters. They say the earmark process needs to be brought out into the open, and then the say the way to do that is to beat Nancy Boyda. What they neglect to tell the voters is that Nancy Boyda has been one of the trailblazers in that very endeavor.
Rep. Boyda yesterday released (for the second year in a row) her list of earmarkrequests, not just the projects that make it into law, but every single earmark she has requested or will request in the future.
Jenkins likes to say "We need to bring the earmark process out of the dark of night" and "We need to bring the process out of Washington's smoke-filled rooms." Well Lynn, we here at LBK couldn't agree more. But see, Nancy Boyda has already done that, not just promised to do so.
Jim Ryun, apparently without recognizing the irony, announced that he'll never seek another earmark. "Hi. My name is Jim Ryun, and I'm addicted to earmarks." That's not the answer either, as there are many of these funding projects that are perfectly legitimate and actually help people in the 2nd district.
"I am joining the earmark reform movement in Washington and will work to repair an obviously broken system," Ryun said. "The earmark crisis is out of control."
See this post at Boyda Bloc for analysis on how it got out of control. But Rep. Boyda's leadership is more than just a link on a website, Rep. Boyda voted for a moratorium on earmarks until a meaningful overhaul of the system can be accomplished.
So how do we fix a broken earmark system? Re-elect Nancy Boyda.
Normally we don't like to link to you right-wing blogs. Kansas has some real questionable conservative blogs, and we hate to say it, but Bounce Boyda is right up there with the worst of them. However, we're going to make an exception just this once.
You see, our friends at Boyda Bloc point out a recent National Review story in which the very same Nancy Boyda your friend Christian Morgan would have Kansans believe is a latte-drinking, volvo-driving, Al Gore-worshiping Liberal is portrayed as a strikingly moderate voice in the United States House of Representatives.
In fact, the story called Boyda the 203rd most liberal member of the House and the 227th most conservative. Basically, she's right square in the middle, just where you'll find the average Kansan.
So surely you right-wingers over at Bounce Boyda will be hollering that this is just another example of the liberal media singing the praises of a liberal politician.
Everyone remembers when Nancy Boyda was rejected for membership in the moderate Blue Dog Coalition.
...
Well, Nancy says, pay no attention to that well-established truth in yesterday's National Journal.
...
She got rejected for the Blue Dogs because she votes with San Fran Nan Pelosi 93% of the time. That's not independent, that's LIBERAL!
One problem. As a commenter on the above-referenced post pointed out, the story inaccurately portrayed the situation between Rep. Boyda and the Blue Dogs. Surely this would put this issue to rest.
Moreover, I tend to believe that the National Journal had the impression Boyda was trying to say she didn't apply to the Blue Dogs. It is a reputable publication with good reporters. (emphasis added)
Let me get this straight. Your blog's sole purpose is to extol the belief that Nancy Boyda is a left-wing zombie being controlled by the voodoo magic of Nancy Pelosi, and when a piece comes out calling her a member of the "Great American Center" the best you can do is quibble about why she didn't join the Blue Dog Coalition?
Then, after being called out by an anonymous commenter, you proceed to declare the source of such praise to be legit and even "reputable"?
So, if it's such a "reputable source" with "good reporters," are you conceding that Rep. Boyda is indeed a moderate? Did you just forget to mention that you think every thing they said about her is wrong? Inquiring minds want to know!
Ok, we're probably setting the bar a little high for ourselves on the first day, but the excriment just keeps flowing from Jim Ryun's campaign. Maybe I should just turn off my rss feed so I won't keep reading things that upset me.
Word from one of the major Republican blogs (I'm not going to post a link, they don't deserve your page views) is Jim Ryun has made a pledge to not request a single earmark if he is elected to the House of Representatives.
First off, not all "porkbarrell spending" is bad. The problem is that under the former Republican Majority (of which Jim Ryun was a member), it had gotten out of control and the projects were 1) ridiculous and 2) put into bills without any debate or even so much as a vote on the floor.
Where was this pledge during the 10 years that Jim Ryun served in the United States House of Representatives? A commenter on the above-mentioned nameless blog aptly described Jim's actions as resembling that of a recovering alcholic. "Hi, my name is Jim Ryun, and I'm addicted to porkbarrell spending."
Did Nancy Boyda request allocations during the 2007 session? Yes, she did. But she has nothing to hide. In fact, she has posted every request she made, even the ones that never made it into law.
These projects are not bridges to nowhere, they're legitimate projects requested in the open that benefit the communities of the 2nd District. Morever, Rep. Boyda has voted to issue a moratorium on further porkbarrell spending until meaningful earmark reform can be decided upon.
Rep. Ryun can make all the promises in the world in his quixotic voyage to win back his seat, but the people of the 2nd District know all to well what Jim Ryun is really about. They lived through 10 years of it.
From our friends over at BoydaBloc, we find a story of Jim Ryun -- JIM RYUN -- crying in his beer (*AHEM* Root Beer - alcohol is a sin against God) about Lynn Jenkins and her shady ethics. Though it wasn't the first time the legitimacy of these ads has been called into question, it was the first time Jim Ryun got involved.
It seems Mr. Robertson has a short memory. You see, Jim Ryun wasn't exactly a boy scout during his years in Congress.
We're not the only ones who noticed the hypocrisy. This video was posted at Boyda Bloc as well as Everyday Citizen.
The jury is still out on whether Lynn Jenkins' actions regarding the Learning Quest advertisements are indeed unethical, but one thing is for sure - watching Jim Ryun in his glass (town) house throwing stones is quite humorous.
Send us your tips, your comments your concerns or just things you find particularly funny or interesting. We're waiting to hear from you! leftbrainedkansas@gmail.com.
