Skip to main content

Proving once again that intellectual consistency is not a hallmark of partisan politics...

... we can find our usual suspect friends at Delawareliberal attacking Mike Castle's vote against the porkulus package (remember, most analysts--and now an increasing number of legislators of both parties--agree that only about 1/3 of the spending in the bill was even related to economic stimulus by the most charitable of standards) in the House of Representatives as

Voting against the jobless, the underemployed, those who fear for their jobs, and struggling small businesses? Ehhhhxcellent!


[This, by the way, ignores the fact that on a series of bipartisan votes, the Senate is now chipping away at the very pork to which Castle and others objected.]

But, strangely enough, they have nothing to say about House Reps in their own party cavorting in the Caribbean on Citigroup's dime (after voting to send dear old Citigroup bazillions of dollars), as Shirley reports....

Here's the roll of honor for that particular junket:

Charlie Rangel
Sheila Jackson-Lee
Donald Payne
Carolyn Cheeks Kilpatrick (mom to that stand-up reformer and current felon Kwame Kilpatrick)
Bennie Thompson
Donna Christenson

Nor have we heard much of anything in that direction about the amazingly porous standards against lobbyists in the new administration, exemplified by the decision to appoint Raytheon lobbyist William Lynn and multiple others to positions of power. If it somehow passed under the radar, here's Senator Carl Levin justifying all the exceptions:

"The decision of the administration to impose an additional set of requirements, and then waive them for this nominee, does not change the standards to which we hold all nominees," he said.

Let's be perfectly clear: Democratic tax-dodging and partying it up at taxpayer-laundered corporate parties does not in any way excuse the culture of corruption in DC over the past eight years as expressed by the excesses of the Republicans.

But you can't keep portraying yourself as the party that's real concerned about the little guy if you don't hold your own to a higher standard.

Comments

Anonymous said…
DelawareLib is like a race horse: as long as the blinders are on there is nothing they see to distract them.
Bowly said…
Why would you go and insult a perfectly innocent racehorse with that comparison?

Popular posts from this blog

A Libertarian Martin Luther King Jr. Day post

In which we travel into interesting waters . . . (for a fairly long trip, so be prepared) Dr. King's 1968 book, Where do we go from here:  chaos or community? , is profound in that it criticizes anti-poverty programs for their piecemeal approach, as John Schlosberg of the Center for a Stateless Society  [C4SS] observes: King noted that the antipoverty programs of the time “proceeded from a premise that poverty is a consequence of multiple evils,” with separate programs each dedicated to individual issues such as education and housing. Though in his view “none of these remedies in itself is unsound,” they “all have a fatal disadvantage” of being “piecemeal,” with their implementation having “fluctuated at the whims of legislative bodies” or been “entangled in bureaucratic stalling.”   The result is that “fragmentary and spasmodic reforms have failed to reach down to the profoundest needs of the poor.” Such single-issue approaches also have “another common failing — ...

Libertarian National Committee Deathwatch Part 1

As the LNC continues to lurch towards collapse, with the latest news of mass layoffs at HQ, I've decided to begin tracking those things leading the national party to irrelevance, even as state and local parties gain power. As news, rumors and rhetoric break out, I shall chronicle them in this ongoing series at Delaware Libertarian. Organizations approaching failure have a number of characteristics. One of the most striking is renunciation of their purpose and effort to reinvent themselves as a "me-too" provider of services in the marketplace. In this, the LNC has been on a collision course with destiny for a while now. Recently, for example, it hired Republican Party web site developer TerraEclipse to redesign the LNC web site . Terra created a web site very similar to those of the clients it brags most about -- far-right Republican conservatives like Tom McClintock and BJ Lawson. A quick look at the web site they built for the LNC is instructive. The tagline on the ...

Soda tax debate reveals fundamental progressive assertions about your lack of individual rights and the "responsiblities" of the State

I thought it would be at least amusing to use the Delawareliberal comments as sub-headings regarding each category of what is wrong with the proposed tax on sodas and juice drinks. But there are so many different little strands of each comment that it would be impossible to pull them all out. So, instead, I'm going to let you read them in more or less the order they appeared, and note the assumptions. pandora: I’m perfectly okay with taxing sodas and juice drinks. Mainly because they’re total crap, and one of the main reasons our country’s children are overweight. They are also dirt cheap. Assumptions here: (1) Because "I" am perfectly okay with a new tax it should be imposed on everybody; (2) it is the government's responsibility to keep children from being obese; (3) the cheapness of the product to be taxed justifies charging people more for it. John Manifold: Soda fattens your kids [and you and your husband], shortens their lives, costs more than water [a...