Saturday, June 27, 2009

What a Lovely Shade of Quisling Green

Eight Republican representatives bought into the Cli-Fi nonsense touted by Obama, Pelosi and Arch Druid Gore and voted in favor of the cap-and-trade legislation (a switch of even four would have doomed the bill’s passage).

I was curious to see whether these folks had anything to say on their official web sites in justification of their support for this economic wrecking-ball. Here’s a sampler.

Mary Bono Mack (California)
Washington, Jun 18 - Congresswoman Mary Bono Mack (CA-45) today issued the following statement on climate change legislation, urging the Majority to allow more time for bipartisan negotiations on the bill before it heads to the House floor for a vote:

“Any bill of this magnitude deserves bipartisan consideration and input,” said Bono Mack. “It is clear that Members on both sides of the aisle have deep concerns about multiple issues within this legislation, and I appreciate the Speaker’s willingness to meet with Republicans today to identify these issues as we move forward.

“As I noted in Committee, this climate change bill is far from perfect but sets us on an important path toward a greener, more sustainable energy future. By allowing this legislation to be fully evaluated and incorporating bipartisan input, we can improve this bill for the benefit of Americans across the country.

“I am concerned that bringing the bill to the floor next week is too premature to properly evaluate Members’ concerns and implement needed improvements.”

Apparently, although “too premature to properly evaluate Members’ concerns”, the bill wasn’t too premature to vote on. There is no rationale provided for her vote in favor of the legislation. Ok, she’s Sonny Bono’s widow and she’s from California, so I’m willing to cut her some slack when it comes to my expectations of minimum intellectual firepower; but she’s married to Rep. Connie Mack, a Florida Republican who voted against this bill. Yo, Connie, how about working a little policy discussion into the pillow talk?

Mike Castle (Delaware)
Mike is obviously a guy who is easily bamboozled. Here is a key quote from a press release issued after the vote:
The recent vote in the U.S. House on the American Clean Energy and Security Act was on whether to pursue these new strategies, or hold on to the status quo. I supported the legislation because it is my belief that we cannot turn away from the opportunity to create new jobs and reduce our dependence on foreign sources of energy. With offshore wind, fuel cells, and solar energy initiatives, Delaware is poised to lead such innovation and create new jobs in these important areas while protecting the tourism industry and our very own coastline.

Translation? I think I can siphon off enough gravy for spending on fruit-loop alternative energy projects to make up for the bill’s initial toxic job shock, so maybe the whole thing will be a wash.

Here’s another comment from this subterranean intellect.
Nations around the world are surging ahead with emission reductions and developing new energy technologies. The United States should be on equal footing, if not leading this effort to remain competitive.

Sure, by all means, the U.S. should strive to be the fastest lemming in that race to the cliff.

David Reichert (Washington)
Energy independence and our national security are critical issues for America. These issues transcend politics. The future of this country is on the line and we can spare no effort when it comes to leading on these issues at a global level.

David Reichert? David Freakin’ Reichert?!? The ex-cop? The guy who spent the better part of his career looking (unsuccessfully) for the Green River Killer? Now the Democrats want to knock off the economy and he’s on their side?

That’s only three, and I’ll be checking out the rest later on, but you see the pattern. These idiots have either fallen for, or are using as a smokescreen, the bogus argument that this bill is about remaining competitive, achieving energy independence (I didn’t see any discussion about expanding drilling for oil, incidentally), and - God help us! – creating new jobs.

Sorry, Republican Party, but if the only difference between the GOP and Democratic Party is the logo, I’ll just hang on to my money and invest it in gold and canned goods.


  1. To be fair, all but 8 Republicans voted AGAINST it, while all but 44 Democrats voted FOR it. They are not the same. Give money directly to the most conservative candidates individually, never to the groups like the NRSC.

    I know you're angry, but there is a world of difference between these jokers and Michele Bachmann or Mike Pence.

  2. "Give money directly to the most conservative candidates individually, never to the groups like the NRSC."

    Exactly my point.

  3. Seriously? You're thinking we should get rid of these Republicans? I realize how sucky this bill was/is, but moderates are facts of life. Reichert only won by a few % points last November. Something like 70% of his district supports cap/trade. He already voted against the stimulus, he's not going to retire himself by voting against cap/trade too. Don't get me wrong, I hate that he voted for it, and were I in his shoes, I'd vote against it, but I UNDERSTAND why he voted for it. It seems to me that if we shall ever win again, we need to run candidates that can win. And like it or not, these representatives can win (with the exception of Bono Mack, who is in a republican leaning area).

  4. Explain why it's necessary to win if we wind up with idiotic legislation?

  5. Let me rephrase that: why is it necessary to waste resources electing Republicans who are going to be forced to vote for abominations such as this in order to keep their jobs, rather than redirect those resources toward other states and districts where incumbent Democrats or likely Democratic challengers are vulnerable, and where the Party can get more bang for the buck? Are some or all of these representatives going to feel compelled to vote for the premier piece of idiotic and dangerous legislation - ObamaCare - in order to please their constituencies? I think conservatives can probably all agree that that is the ultimate test.

    Politics isn't just a game of shirts vs. skins; there are real consequences associated with bankrolling Republicans who are subject to the gravitational pull of their leftist constituencies, which can affect not just their own seats, but the larger issues that affect the whole country. If the GOP winds up seeing itself as nothing more than a mass of barnacles attached to the hull of the Ship of State, content to retard the pace, but resigned to the ultimate destination mapped out by the Democrats, then the Party is doomed to a slow death (and maybe not so slow, at that).

  6. I can't wait for this week. Rush and Mark Levin have the long knives out for these tr8ors. Rush has all but guaranteed they won't be re-elected and Levin said he'll make their names more well-known than they've ever dreamed.

  7. Sounds a lot like something I said in less diplomatic terms...

  8. Great post!
    Keep up the excellent work!

    ps. Link Exchange