Ron Paul getting kicked in shins by Democratic whippersnapper over Katrina vote
Shane Sklar, the young whippersnapper Democrat who's challenging Republican Congressman Ron Paul, jumped on the grumpy gynecologist for voting nay on federal aid to Katrina victims.
Charles Kuffner calls it "a very smart line of attack."
We're still waiting for Sklar to rip Paul's anti-war stance. If he's already done so, we missed it. But that may be a tough stance for a Dem to take. How do you attack an anti-war Republican? That one may not be in the Demo Playbook.
[off the kuff]
Posts
4 comments:
Sklar is barking up the wrong tree on that one!
I mean, what is Sklar after, the Louisiana vote? Or the votes of Texas taxpayers who are gonna help pay for this at the fed level but also will wind up eating some of this on the state and local level.
I am a volunteer in the relief effort and even I question the need for everything the feds are spending and who it is going to!
I am also wondering just how much it is really gonna cost local Texas taxpayers when its all said and done.
The dem Senate minority leader estimated $150 billion for the fed expenses on Katrina.
I say it will go much higher, and Paul will look smart for voting no, especially after all the news about how little NOLA and LA. state government have done for themselves gets around.
Big questions are gonna be raised by voters and taxpayers over these expenditures, and how much is being done for a city and a state that would not help itself.
Already, the media is raising questions about the companies involved, their political connections, the lack of bidding procedures and how much they are being paid.
What else is Kuffner going to say?
:)
Here's a more philosophical question -- don't you think it's useful for us to have nags in Congress, people who will throw out a contrarian view and challenge us to make sure we know what we're doing?
Hell, when John McCain criticizes some element of federal spending, the media and the Dems have orgasms.
Isn't that okay, especially when the legislation in question is going to pass overwhelmingly, regardless?
The role of nag is very underappreciated.
And yes, I'm guilty of underappreciating John McCain quite often, so don't take this as my pointing at everyone but me. I'm just offerin' up a different perspective. :)
If the pork riders we all know are coming aren't enough, this alone is a valid reason for Paul's vote against the relief bill:
"Republicans said Karl Rove, the White House deputy chief of staff and Mr. Bush's chief political adviser, was in charge of the reconstruction effort, which reaches across many agencies of government..."
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/09/15/politics/15bush.html
What else is Kuffner going to say?
Well, how about:
"That's not the approach I would have taken."
or
"That's a good start, but it doesn't go far enough."
or
"I see his point, but he's overstating the case."
Or I could have said nothing, if I didn't think I had anything of value to offer. It does happen, you know.
Please let me know if I can be of further assistance. :-)
-- Kuff
Post a Comment