Previous post
Next post
I would normally say un-freakin-believable, but well… honestly, is anyone really surprised?
Transcript:
“I’ll tell you my impression. We really in this last election, when I say we…the Democrats, I think pushed it as far as we can to the end of the fleet, didn’t say it, but we implied it. That if we won the Congressional elections, we could stop the war. Now anybody was a good student of Government would know that wasn’t true. But you know, the temptation to want to win back the Congress, we sort of stretched the facts…and people ate it up.“
They needed to win back Congress, and they know better than us ignorant hicks anyways. So what does it matter if they “stretch the facts” to get what they want?
The man in the video, by the way, is Pennsylvania Congressman Paul Kanjorski. He’s a career member of the Financial Services Committee who likes to generate lots of pork for his district.
I guess what Rep. Kanjorski is saying is that Dems had no intention of actually fighting to end the war, which I guess is a good thing. They just made a lot of empty promises and “stretched the facts” in order to dupe Americans into voting them into Congress. Once there, they could do all they wanted and start trying to inflict their socialist agenda onto us.
Surprised that they did this? Not really. Surprised that he said it in public? Hell yes.
Jeff Emanuel has more commentary.
Hat Tip: Ace
WayneB says: I’m not sure they misrepresented themselves that much. They DID send Bush some bills that would have cut funding and effectively scaled back the American presence in Iraq significantly. He vetoed them, and they didn’t have enough support to override the veto. Maybe they didn’t fight rabidly to do it, but they probably knew that if they did, THEN there would have been enough of a hue and cry raised that they would have to back off. Besides, their popularity is already at record lows. They probably figured that as long as they presented the bills, their Far-Left supporters would see it as following through.
I am loathe to admit it, but I live in Rep. Kanjorski’s district, and I am working in the hopes he will be turned out by Mayor Lou Barletta.
I R A Darth Aggie says: Maybe they didn’t fight rabidly to do it, but they probably knew that if they did, THEN there would have been enough of a hue and cry raised that they would have to back off.
Why would there have been a hue and cry against them? after all, that’s precisely what they promised to do: cut the funding and get the troops out of Dodge. The Congress under Dem leadership has become the do nothing Congress.
What is breathtaking about this statement is that it’s…honest…and not spin.
WayneB says: Why would there have been a hue and cry against them?
From those of us who support the WoT, not the supporters that they made their promises to. If the Dems had made a huge push to force the funding cuts through, we would have shut down the switchboards nearly as badly as we did on the Amnesty Bill. So they put the bills up in token of their promises, but didn’t make a big stink about them being vetoed. Of course, they did bring it up, because it WAS the first time Bush found his veto pen, but that didn’t fly very well, so they pretty much dropped it.
4 Comments