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.
The conservative advocacy group Freedom Watch -- which used to focus on national security issues but apparently now has no particular "cause" -- has announced that it will be making robocalls into a few dozen Congressional districts, including the Kansas 2nd (Nancy Boyda). The group said the ads will focus on gas prices and Rep. Boyda's vote against offshore drilling.
This obsession with affecting gas prices by increasing supply infuriates me.
I don't know if y'all remember Econ 101, but there are two sides to that chart that looks like an X. You've got the supply part down. In theory, increasing supply while demand remains constant will decrease the price (though economists believe IF such a theory were to work, it would take nearly a decade to see any noticeable affect).
The problem is, most economists believe any increase in supply will result in a corresponding increase in demand, thereby negating any downward pressure on price and perhaps even causing it to rise some. Not to mention increasing carbon output and ignoring our reliance on carbon-based fuels of which we have a finite supply.
I'm not going to go so far as to imply that its a poorly disguised attempt to increase oil consumption and thus increase the profits of oil companies, but it sort of makes you wonder.
That other line? That's called demand. On this side, the theory is if demand decreases while supply remains constant, prices will decrease.
The answer is conservation. Jimmy Carter hit the nail on the head in his American Malaise speech, though he was chastised for it, the only way to truly ween ourselves off of oil is to enact policies that affect demand, not supply.
We need to be focusing on designing and developing American cars that might actually be feasible to sell 10 years from now. The SUV, the 5,000 lbs car and the 6.5 liter V8 are dying, and it's time for Detroit to realize that.
We need to enact policies that make public transportation in the midwest a real possibility.
We need to start investing in ethanol that is not made from things that we might want to eat.
We need to stop promoting shortsighted policies that do nothing more than increase the profits of oil companies.
The truth is, no matter what we do, gas prices aren't going to be $2.00 a gallon anymore. The only real solution is taking steps to ween ourselves off of ALL oil, not just foreign oil.
Poll numbers show this may not be as preposterous as it sounds.
In a poll released yesterday, SurveyUSA indicates McCain holds a 49-39 lead in the state with 12% of the electorate undecided.
In a state where Republican Presidential candidates routinely put up numbers north of 60%, it's significant that McCain cannot break 50.
It should be noted that Huckabee handily won the Kansas Caucus after McCain had already effectively won the nomination and, much like the Democrats who claim they won't vote for Obama or Clinton, many of these jilted Republicans will come back into the fold before it's all said and done.
Additionally, respondents were 42% Republicans, 40% Democrat and 18% Unaffiliated. Democratic registration in the state is on the rise, but this is probably a more Democratic sample than the population as a whole.
These quirks aside, SurveyUSA has been quite successful this cycle in predicting notoriously difficult to predict primaries, so it provides at the very least for some interesting discussion.
The second thing this poll provides is a counterpoint to the recent Rasmussen poll that shows more Kansans would be less likely to vote for Obama with Kathleen Sebelius on the ticket.
The poll showed, not surprisingly, that Huckabee would be McCain's strongest running mate. Among the Democratic pairs matched with Huckabee, Obama/Sebelius does the best by far at a mere +4 for McCain.
Minnesota governor Tim Pawlenty is the only McCain running mate who causes Obama to lose ground (a whole point) with Sebelius on his ticket and former North Carolina Senator John Edwards is the only Obama running mate that does better than Sebelius.
As they say, the only poll that matters is in November, but this poll lends credence to the argument that Obama makes Kansas competitive. If McCain pulls in 55% instead of 60%, that spells bad news for Republicans and could mean Obama brings Nancy Boyda, Jim Slattery and Donald Betts along for the ride.
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.
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!
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.
