An example of a Democratic Congressman that should be voted out - Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community

dogzilla · 10-19-2010, 04:13 AM

My Congressional rep, Maurice Hinchey (D-NY-22) is a perfect example of a liberal Democrat that needs to be sent into retirement. I attended a debate between him and his opponent George Philips last week where written questions were accepted from the audience.

One of those questions was for the candidate to describe their priorities for deficit reduction. Hinchey didn't even have an answer for the question. He started asking about what deficit and if the question was related to his personal finances, etc. To make this even better, this is a senior member of the House appropriations committee and he has no ideas about how to reduce the deficit.

Here's the article from the local paper.

22nd CD: Hinchey, Phillips spar over key issues - DailyFreeman.com

Quote:

Hinchey, a nine-term incumbent from Hurley, several times needed questions repeated for him and at one point responded when the moderator asked, “Please detail your deficit reduction priorities?” by saying, “I’m not sure what you mean by that. What deficit? My deficit personally?”

After being told it meant the “government’s” deficit, Hinchey said: “This country has had a deficit in all of its legislation, passing out spending, for all, well, well over 100 years. Every year, and then it comes back and the thing is adjusted.”

Phillips, a Binghamton-area history teacher, responded: “I’m deeply troubled that a member of the House Appropriations Committee could not even begin to fathom that we have a deficit problem, and I think this underscores the problem in Washington, D.C., right now. We have an almost $2 trillion budget deficit this year, and my opponent said he wanted another trillion dollars into the failed stimulus.”

At another point in the debate, Hinchey commented that Medicare and Medicaid were not in trouble. The audience found that comment quite amusing and the moderator had to remind the audience to be quiet because they were laughing so much.

Quote:

“Why did ... we pass a bill that had $500 billion in Medicare cuts that is going to hurt seniors in this area?” Phillips said. “Why did we pass a bill that is driving health insurance costs up for every small business I’ve talked to six months later? Why did we pass a bill that didn’t have some of the reforms in it that we had asked for? Why did we pass a bill that Congress didn’t bother to read? Over 2,000 pages long, over one-sixth of our economy.”

Hinchey countered that the insurance companies were driving prices up in advance of changes that won’t take effect until 2012 and 2014, and he drew laughs from the audience when he said “Medicaid and Medicare are not in financial trouble.

To make this even better, Hinchey put his hands on a reporter who was asking him some embarrassing questions about how Hinchey profited personally from some of the deals he cut in Washington.

Dustup with reporter grabs attention (videos) - DailyFreeman.com

Quote:

“All of a sudden, I see Hinchey moving towards me and coming directly at me, face to face,” Kemble said. “I remember fingers around my neck.”

Kemble said that Hinchey held his fingers there for a few seconds.

Kemble said he recalled thinking to himself to “just breathe” and, then Hinchey must have realized “what he was doing and just stopped.”

Kemble proceeded to cover the debate and filed a story for the Freeman that was published Friday morning.

Mike Morosi, a Hinchey spokesman, said the congressman “regrets that he didn’t walk away sooner to end the heated exchange.

Which isn't the first time Hinchey broke the law

Federal Offices for Orange County NY by Orange County NY Shooters

Quote:

Rep. Maurice Hinchey (D-NY) pleaded no contest Jan. 5 to a charge of carrying a loaded handgun in his baggage at Washington National Airport and was given a "suspended imposition of sentence."
Hinchey's lawyer, David Lenefsky, said, "We did not plead guilty to anything because we had no intent to violate any statute."
Lenefsky said that by his plea Hinchey acknowledged the hand gun was his and that he had a license to carry it in New York, but not in Virginia.
"The handgun was inadvertently in a piece of luggage I took from my upstate New York home when I drove back to Washington for the late-November congressional session, and it was still in that piece of unopened luggage on Dec. 1 when I decided to fly back to New York, "Hinchey said in a statement.
Hinchey, who voted for the anti-gun Brady Bill, appeared before Judge Joseph Gwaltney in a county district court. The judge's slap-on-the-wrist ruling means sentencing was suspended and will be lifted automatically in a year. You know what would have happened if it had been you instead of a Congressman -you'd get out of prison sometime in the Twenty-Third Century.

Ironically, Hinchey is an anti-gun Congressman.

I read an article on politico.com that claims 90 Democratic seats in the House are at risk. Here's to hoping the Republicans win every single one of them, especially Hinchey's.

Derwood · 10-19-2010, 03:58 PM

There are a bunch of Democrats who are useless. Is this news?

As for deficit reduction, NO candidate will ever go into those specifics during a debate or on the campaign trail. Why? Because saying what you'll CUT is a sure way to piss off the people whose funds are going away. EVERY candidate waffles on that question

dogzilla · 10-20-2010, 02:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Derwood

There are a bunch of Democrats who are useless. Is this news?

As for deficit reduction, NO candidate will ever go into those specifics during a debate or on the campaign trail. Why? Because saying what you'll CUT is a sure way to piss off the people whose funds are going away. EVERY candidate waffles on that question

What's the point of a debate if you're not going to take a stand on priorities? So he didn't want to piss off people by telling them what his deficit priorities are? What about the people he pissed off by dodging the question? If you read the article, Hinchey didn't do well at all in that debate. He's been in Congress 18 years and stands a very good chance of being booted out in a couple weeks.

Tully Mars · 10-20-2010, 02:26 AM

Listen to the GOP this weekend when asked how they were going to pay for the continued tax cuts they support... waffle city. Deficit reductions aren't really a priority to either party, gaining or staying is power is their only priority. The only way to get elected is to tell people what they want to hear even if that's completely unworkable.

Xazy · 10-20-2010, 04:41 AM

Sorry but that sounds pathetic that a congressman can not answer such a basic question. Sadly bad politicians are known to frequently be re-elected.

I hope you have a candidate though to vote for, sadly in NY governor race we are stuck between a rabid dog (paladino) and cuomo who is more of the same.

I just found this another candidate who is scary

Quote:

Delaware Republican Senate candidate Christine O'Donnell's question "Where in the Constitution is the separation of church and state?" in an exchange Oct. 19 over teaching creationism in public schools tells us something about her but also reminds us of how often America's bedrock principles on government and religion are misunderstood.

Democratic candidate Chris Coons was quick to tell O'Donnell that religion and government are kept separate by the First Amendment.

"You're telling me that's in the First Amendment?" she responded.

Indeed it is. Here's a quick take on what the First Amendment says -- and doesn't say:

Seaver · 10-20-2010, 05:40 AM

Separation of Church and state is not explicitly stated in the 1st Amendment... however is made unable to be enacted as it would inevitably play favorites in which church gets the influence.

The truth is it was only stated in Jefferson's letters to a Baptist Minister, telling him to STFU about injecting God into politics.

dogzilla · 10-20-2010, 05:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Xazy

Sorry but that sounds pathetic that a congressman can not answer such a basic question. Sadly bad politicians are known to frequently be re-elected.

I don't think Hinchey even considers deficit reduction a priority. He's a member of the socialist wing of the Democratic party that has backed Obamacare, Obama's stimulus programs and advocated even more stimuls spending.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Xazy

I hope you have a candidate though to vote for, sadly in NY governor race we are stuck between a rabid dog (paladino) and cuomo who is more of the same.

His opponent seemed pretty credible and sharp to me during the debate. As far as Paladino/Cuomo, it's unfortunate that Paladino got the nomination. From what I understand of Albany politics, the Senate and Assembly will limit any governor from doing really wacky stuff. I've suffered thru 12 years in this state with Mario Cuomo as governor and that was enough of having the Cuomo family involved in politics here.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Xazy

I just found this another candidate who is scary

Yeah, hopefully, if elected she wisens up fairly quickly or she will be gone. In the meantime, one more member of the bipartisan loony coalition in DC.

Baraka_Guru · 10-20-2010, 05:51 AM

And you Americans wonder why many of us outsiders look to your politics as a spectator sport....or circus....

roachboy · 10-20-2010, 06:18 AM

outside of the tiny blinkered world of conservative economic theory, deficits are not meaningful in the way that tiny blinkered world would have the tiny blinkered people who live in it believe. in the bigger reality-place, there's lots of reasons for states to run deficits and lots of reasons for those deficits to be maintained.

but really, republicans don't give a fuck about deficit reduction. they're advocating tax cuts that would balloon the deficit and support continuing obscene levels of military spending to boot.

so all you're complaining about, dogzilla, is that the ithaca congressman isn't subservient enough to act as though conservative talking points are worth taking seriously.

they aren't.

this speaks to the underlying problem:

Quote:

Democrats suffer from Americans' unwillingness to accept economic reality

By Steven Pearlstein
Tuesday, October 19, 2010; 9:30 PM

It's one of the great fallacies in politics: Candidate Jones says X, Y and Z during the campaign. Candidate Jones wins the election. Ergo, the public agrees with X, Y and Z.

Certainly there are times when that may be true, but just as often it is not. After all, if that were always true, then voters should now be ecstatic that President Obama delivered on his campaign promise of health-care reform, while being mad as hell that nothing's been done about global warming.

So maybe that wasn't what voters were really thinking way back in 2008. Maybe voters were simply angry about the lousy economy and looking for a new team to take the country in a new direction. And maybe that's the story this year as well.

As for the details of that new direction, it's not at all clear what voters have in mind. Most voters - particularly the swing voters - aren't as well-informed as they might be on major policy issues. What they do have are experiences and instincts and emotions that politicians play upon in order to win elections. Rarely, however, do the election results add up to a mandate. More often it's nothing more than a temporary license to govern.

Americans, it is said, are suddenly recoiling at the dramatic expansion in the reach and power of a federal government that is "taking over" the economy. Topping this list of alleged voter grievances is a new health-care law that requires every American to buy health insurance, a new consumer protection agency for financial products and the government bailout of the auto industry.

Now ask yourself: Do you think the results of the coming election would be tilting in favor of Democrats if the "individual mandate" had been omitted from health reform, if the consumer protection agency had been dropped from financial regulatory reform and if General Motors had been left to die. Somehow I doubt it.

The dirty little secret is that most Americans don't really know what they think about the issues that so animate the political conversation in Washington, and what they think they know about them is often wrong.

Most Americans still think that the bailouts of the banks, the auto companies and American International Group will wind up costing taxpayers hundreds of billions of dollars. In fact, the latest guess is that the government will come out even on the deal, and may even turn a profit.

Many Americans think that the economic stimulus package has been a failure. In fact, the estimates from a wide range of experts say the stimulus has saved or created more than 3 million jobs.

Many Americans believe their federal taxes have gone up in the past two years. In fact, for 90 percent of households, taxes were temporarily cut.

After the headlines of the past few weeks, most Americans probably think government has been able to do little, if anything to stem the tidal wave of foreclosures. In fact, over the past 18 months, two mortgages have been modified to avoid foreclosure for every completed foreclosure.

Oh, yes, and then there is the budget deficit, which many Americans think is out of control because of runaway spending orchestrated by President Obama and the Democratic Congress. That deficit, in turn, is blamed for the lackluster economy.

In fact, the deficit has nothing to do with today's slow growth and high unemployment. Indeed, many economists, including those at the International Monetary Fund, think that increasing the deficit even further would be a good way to reduce unemployment in the short term.

And who is responsible for this year's record federal deficit? Roughly half of it was already baked into the cake by the time Obama came into office, with another quarter coming from the "automatic stabilizers" that reduce tax collections and increase spending on things like unemployment insurance and food stamps when the economy is in recession. The rest comes from the one-time stimulus which, once it runs its course, will leave a "structural deficit" that is no bigger than it was when George W. Bush left office.

The simple truth is that Obama and the Democratic Congress were dealt a lousy economic hand, and they've played it about as well as anyone could. Along with their predecessors and the holdovers at the Federal Reserve, they prevented a collapse of the global financial system and a 1930s-like depression. But given the magnitude of the financial crisis and the global imbalances that gave rise to it, a prolonged period of slow growth and high unemployment was almost inevitable.

The political reality, however, is that voters are unwilling to accept that economic reality. They want to believe that government has the power to control the economy and fix it quickly when it breaks down. They are encouraged in that belief by politicians and special interest groups, by the media and by too many economists.

That said, trying to convince voters that things could have been worse was not a viable political strategy for Democrats in 2010. Against a backdrop of stagnant incomes and declining home prices and 10 percent unemployment, toting up the number of jobs saved, mortgages modified or bridges repaired was never going to be a winning argument. What voters needed was a broader vision of where the country needed to go and how we could get there, a credible story of how shared sacrifice today could lead to shared prosperity tomorrow.

The inability of President Obama and Democratic leaders to articulate such a vision and tell that story now threatens their governing majority. Republicans may soon be the beneficiaries of that failure. Their victory, however, will be similarly short-lived if they mistake their good fortune for a mandate for lower taxes, less regulation and further erosion of the economic safety net.

In politics as in many competitive arenas, sometimes you win simply because the other guy loses.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...l?hpid=topnews

dippin · 10-20-2010, 06:34 AM

The day republicans say they want to cut medicare, social security or military spending, or that they want to increase taxes, is the day they can be taken seriously over things like deficit reduction. Until then, saying that deficits don't matter much is at least a more coherent position.

Baraka_Guru · 10-20-2010, 06:45 AM

The Republicans have a proven track record of deficit spending. What they have yet to prove of late is how to reduce it. At least Clinton knew how. With hope, maybe Obama can demonstrate it as well. That might be overly optimistic, however. It's a rather dire economic situation.

Anyway, if you look at the numbers, Obama is spending more like a Republican than like a Democrat, but I chalk that up to the economic crisis...oh, and the wars Bush II started.

Tully Mars · 10-20-2010, 09:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Seaver

Separation of Church and state is not explicitly stated in the 1st Amendment... however is made unable to be enacted as it would inevitably play favorites in which church gets the influence.

The truth is it was only stated in Jefferson's letters to a Baptist Minister, telling him to STFU about injecting God into politics.

I'm not sure I understand this comment. Could you clarify?

Quote:

however is made unable to be enacted as it would inevitably play favorites in which church gets the influence.

Xazy · 10-20-2010, 09:42 AM

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof ...." Is the basis for it in the first amendment. "Separation of church and state" was used in a letter by Jefferson in regards to different clauses in the first amendment, to assure the Baptists that this would basically help protect them.

This clause has been clarified since by the Supreme court, and we won't get in to all the political stuff about how polygamy is illegal if it is a religious thing.

dogzilla · 10-20-2010, 02:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by roachboy

outside of the tiny blinkered world of conservative economic theory, deficits are not meaningful in the way that tiny blinkered world would have the tiny blinkered people who live in it believe. in the bigger reality-place, there's lots of reasons for states to run deficits and lots of reasons for those deficits to be maintained.

I can't perpetually borrow my way to prosperity and neither can the government. The percentage of federal spending allocated to paying the debt is growing year to year and has been a concern for a number of years. Obama and the liberal/socialist Democrats don't care, they just want to stick it to the taxpayers so the politicians and the entitlement class can keep their entitlements.

So any politician who basically admits he has no deficit reduction priorities will not get my vote.

Besides which, a politician like Hinchey who assaults news reporters is better suited to being in the county jail than being in Congress, and a politician who packs a loaded gun on an airline in violation of gun laws doesn't belong in Congress.

Neither does a politician like Hinchey who refuses to answer questions about how he and his friends profit from deals made to get government funding for development in his district.

---------- Post added at 06:37 PM ---------- Previous post was at 06:30 PM ----------

Quote:

Originally Posted by dippin

The day republicans say they want to cut medicare, social security or military spending, or that they want to increase taxes, is the day they can be taken seriously over things like deficit reduction. Until then, saying that deficits don't matter much is at least a more coherent position.

This Republican/conservative/Tea Party supporter is fine with cutting military spending. I was in favor of privatizing Social Security. My 401K has outperformed Social Security so I'd be better off if Social Security never existed.

---------- Post added at 06:39 PM ---------- Previous post was at 06:37 PM ----------

Quote:

Originally Posted by Baraka_Guru

And you Americans wonder why many of us outsiders look to your politics as a spectator sport....or circus....

It's a matter of perspective. I've always considered British Parliament to be great theater, as well as those clips that make it into TV programs from time to time of how legislative sessions in other countries turn into fistfights.

The current chaos in France is equally entertaining.

Tully Mars · 10-20-2010, 02:41 PM

My 401K took a 40%, give or take, hit in late 2007 and has never completely recovered.

Baraka_Guru · 10-20-2010, 02:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dogzilla

It's a matter of perspective. I've always considered British Parliament to be great theater, as well as those clips that make it into TV programs from time to time of how legislative sessions in other countries turn into fistfights.

The current chaos in France is equally entertaining.

It really is. Canadian politics are usually pretty drab and straightforward, but it's interesting enough if you want to see actual politics. We don't get much of the crazy stuff, just the occasional bitching.

SecretMethod70 · 10-20-2010, 04:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Baraka_Guru

It really is. Canadian politics are usually pretty drab and straightforward, but it's interesting enough if you want to see actual politics. We don't get much of the crazy stuff, just the occasional bitching.

Hey now, this is not "drab and straightforward"... it's AWESOME

YouTube - Sam Katz NOT for Mayor 1

Baraka_Guru · 10-20-2010, 04:22 PM

SirLance · 10-20-2010, 06:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tully Mars

Listen to the GOP this weekend when asked how they were going to pay for the continued tax cuts they support... waffle city. Deficit reductions aren't really a priority to either party, gaining or staying is power is their only priority. The only way to get elected is to tell people what they want to hear even if that's completely unworkable.

Couldn't have said it better myself!

10-19-2010, 03:58 PM	#2 (permalink)
Derwood Who You Crappin? Location: Everywhere and Nowhere	There are a bunch of Democrats who are useless. Is this news? As for deficit reduction, NO candidate will ever go into those specifics during a debate or on the campaign trail. Why? Because saying what you'll CUT is a sure way to piss off the people whose funds are going away. EVERY candidate waffles on that question __________________ "You can't shoot a country until it becomes a democracy." - Willravel

10-20-2010, 02:26 AM	#4 (permalink)
Tully Mars Living in a Warmer Insanity Super Moderator Location: Yucatan, Mexico	Listen to the GOP this weekend when asked how they were going to pay for the continued tax cuts they support... waffle city. Deficit reductions aren't really a priority to either party, gaining or staying is power is their only priority. The only way to get elected is to tell people what they want to hear even if that's completely unworkable. __________________ I used to drink to drown my sorrows, but the damned things have learned how to swim- Frida Kahlo Vice President Starkizzer Fan Club

10-20-2010, 05:40 AM	#6 (permalink)
Seaver Junkie Location: Fort Worth, TX	Separation of Church and state is not explicitly stated in the 1st Amendment... however is made unable to be enacted as it would inevitably play favorites in which church gets the influence. The truth is it was only stated in Jefferson's letters to a Baptist Minister, telling him to STFU about injecting God into politics. __________________ "Smite the rocks with the rod of knowledge, and fountains of unstinted wealth will gush forth." - Ashbel Smith as he laid the first cornerstone of the University of Texas

10-20-2010, 05:51 AM	#8 (permalink)
Baraka_Guru warrior bodhisattva Super Moderator Location: East-central Canada	And you Americans wonder why many of us outsiders look to your politics as a spectator sport....or circus.... __________________ Knowing that death is certain and that the time of death is uncertain, what's the most important thing? —Bhikkhuni Pema Chödrön Humankind cannot bear very much reality. —From "Burnt Norton," Four Quartets (1936), T. S. Eliot

10-20-2010, 06:45 AM	#11 (permalink)
Baraka_Guru warrior bodhisattva Super Moderator Location: East-central Canada	The Republicans have a proven track record of deficit spending. What they have yet to prove of late is how to reduce it. At least Clinton knew how. With hope, maybe Obama can demonstrate it as well. That might be overly optimistic, however. It's a rather dire economic situation. Anyway, if you look at the numbers, Obama is spending more like a Republican than like a Democrat, but I chalk that up to the economic crisis...oh, and the wars Bush II started. __________________ Knowing that death is certain and that the time of death is uncertain, what's the most important thing? —Bhikkhuni Pema Chödrön Humankind cannot bear very much reality. —From "Burnt Norton," Four Quartets (1936), T. S. Eliot Last edited by Baraka_Guru; 10-20-2010 at 06:49 AM..

10-20-2010, 06:34 AM	#10 (permalink)
dippin Crazy, indeed Location: the ether	The day republicans say they want to cut medicare, social security or military spending, or that they want to increase taxes, is the day they can be taken seriously over things like deficit reduction. Until then, saying that deficits don't matter much is at least a more coherent position.

10-20-2010, 09:42 AM	#13 (permalink)
Xazy People in masks cannot be trusted Location: NYC	"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof ...." Is the basis for it in the first amendment. "Separation of church and state" was used in a letter by Jefferson in regards to different clauses in the first amendment, to assure the Baptists that this would basically help protect them. This clause has been clarified since by the Supreme court, and we won't get in to all the political stuff about how polygamy is illegal if it is a religious thing. __________________ Now, a clever man would put the poison into his own goblet, because he would know that only a great fool would reach for what he was given. I am not a great fool, so I can clearly not choose the wine in front of you. But you must have known I was not a great fool, you would have counted on it, so I can clearly not choose the wine in front of me.

10-20-2010, 02:41 PM	#15 (permalink)
Tully Mars Living in a Warmer Insanity Super Moderator Location: Yucatan, Mexico	My 401K took a 40%, give or take, hit in late 2007 and has never completely recovered. __________________ I used to drink to drown my sorrows, but the damned things have learned how to swim- Frida Kahlo Vice President Starkizzer Fan Club

10-20-2010, 04:22 PM	#18 (permalink)
Baraka_Guru warrior bodhisattva Super Moderator Location: East-central Canada	__________________ Knowing that death is certain and that the time of death is uncertain, what's the most important thing? —Bhikkhuni Pema Chödrön Humankind cannot bear very much reality. —From "Burnt Norton," Four Quartets (1936), T. S. Eliot