Leonard Lance Goes Hypocrite Again

Take a step back... (0.00 / 0)

for a moment.

First off. I like Lance. I don't think he's been in the legislature long enough to judge yet, but having said that...

But my point is the following...

How is this different from Republicans branding Democrats who didn't vote for war funding as 'Not Supporting the Troops'?

Additionally, it's been pointed out that very few, if any, Democrats supported any of the Bush budgets, does that mean they are not entitled to offer input on how taxes were spent?

Lastly, as a home owner, I don't think voting against a school budget necessarily means I don't want the school funded at any level.

All I am saying is that I don't believe these issues are as black as you make it seem... and there are many, many, more examples I can come up with if pressed.

"Where ever you go, there you are." - Buckaroo Bonzai

---

by: William Weber (WjcW) @ Thu Apr 09, 2009 at 16:20:46 PM UTC

Extremely different (0.00 / 0)

It's different from the supporting the troops issue because not funding the war would have brought the troops home from the war zone.  Doing so would have prevent head wounds, PTSD, death and other minor ailments.  The troops were a cat's paw for the right, with the GOP pretending that any decision not to utilize the military as Bush saw fit was an attack on troops.  There was no way to equate funding the war with supporting the troops -- only as supporting the mission Bush selected.  

Lance said the stimulus was a mistake, an error, and that is was a moral decision not to vote for it.  Now he wants it.  If it was a moral decision to vote no, then it is immoral to accept the cash.

In this case, it was Lance himself who said the stimulus was wrong, and now he wants to use it.  What makes it different is that Lance himself is the one who set the terms of the argument, and then Lance took the other position.  That's what makes a hypocrite.

As for the school budget, that's a little different.  When you vote yes or no you understand there will be a school budget passed  The schools will be funded at a level near the budget being voted on, so a no vote is not to spend no money, but a vote not to spend that much or to spend it in a different way.

The same is true for Bush's budgets, because everyone knew there would be a federal budget.  The same is true for Obama's budget, which Lance also voted against.  There will be a budget passed funding many projects in the district, so voting against the whole bill is not a vote against each individual expenditure.

BUT the stimulus bill is different.  If it failed, it would be likely that there would be no stimulus bill and no funding for these projects.  A vote against the stimulus bill was a vote not to spend money to stimulate the economy and not to spend it on any of those projects.  To vote not to spend on stimulus then beg to get stimulus money is hypocritical.

Keep coming with the examples.  

---

by: vmars @ Sun Apr 12, 2009 at 19:22:12 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

In Defense of Rep. Lance (0.00 / 0)

While I usually find myself supporting Democratic candidates, last year I support Rep. Lance in his run for Congress for a variety of reasons.  For one, his dedication to decreasing the public debt and requiring voter approval for public borrowing in New Jersey was admirable to me.  Secondly, his moderate social positions appealed to me.  And thirdly, his strong support of environmentalism.  So just to clear this up, yes, I do support my Congressman.

Now, you are accusing him of hypocrisy because he opposed President Obama's stimulus package but now he is trying to secure stimulus funding for projects in his district.  
I supported the stimulus package, but I can see why all the Republicans in the House of Representatives opposed it.  Why, you ask?  Simply put, it's a Democratic bill.  A huge chunk of the Democratic agenda was put into that bill; billions and billions of dollars were being allocated not for job creation, not for tax cuts for middle- and working-class Americans, not for infrastructure projects -- but for all kinds of things that were part of the Democratic agenda.  

Now, I'm not saying that I personally opposed those things.  In fact, I supported many of them.  But it's unfair to accuse Lance of hypocrisy for voting against a Christmas tree bill like that.  Lance supported infrastructure projects, tax cuts for the middle- and working-classes, and job creation.  He openly expressed his support for those things.  But why would he -- or any of the far less centrist Republicans, for that matter -- vote for a bill with so many things in it that they disagreed with?  

My point is simple:  Just because Rep. Lance opposed the stimulus package as a whole does not mean that he opposed key parts of the bill like job creation or infrastructure projects.  Accusing him of hypocrisy now for trying to secure funds for the Green Brook flood control project or anything else is a purely political and factually illegitimate attack.  

---

by: NJCentrist @ Mon Apr 13, 2009 at 15:09:44 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

NJCentrist... (0.00 / 0)

said it much better than I.

But I don't think you're being accurate when you quote Lance as...

Lance said the stimulus was a mistake, an error, and that is was a moral decision not to vote for it.

As I remember it, the Republican opposition was based on the size and scope of the bill, not 'no stimulus at all, ever.'

"Where ever you go, there you are." - Buckaroo Bonzai

---

by: William Weber (WjcW) @ Mon Apr 13, 2009 at 16:32:34 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

PS. Why couldn't... (0.00 / 0)

the vote against the stimulus have been a 'vote against bills no one (by their OWN admission) had read completely'

Another valid reason.

"Where ever you go, there you are." - Buckaroo Bonzai

---

by: William Weber (WjcW) @ Mon Apr 13, 2009 at 18:25:13 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

NJ Dems used to do the same thing... (0.00 / 0)

...when they were in minority.  

how about this Pallone press release:

http://www.house.gov/list/pres...

guess what?  Pallone was one of 137 Dems to vote against a massive spending bill (House Roll Call Vote 676, Dec. 8, 2003)

is Pallone a hypocrite?

I don't think so since the spending bill was a mammouth piece o' sh*t.  but it had some good in it.

the fact is the stimulus is the law of the land so it's up to elected officials to follow the laws and not hold legislative grudges.  

that's what Pallone did in the past and that's what Lance appears to be doing now.

---

by: maxidoodler @ Mon Apr 13, 2009 at 18:31:00 PM UTC