Is it any wonder that you don’t hear a peep from Pete Olson about the recent NRCC hit piece against Nick Lampson? The piece is running on several TV channels in the Houston media market and has raised eyebrows of those of us who watch what our congressman does, and what he doesn’t do.
Take a gander at the hit piece in this You Tube embed. Hit the pause button when you see the photo of the military jet taking off. You see in the lower left corner their citation of the house vote of the bill that Nick Lampson supposedly voted against on December 17, 2007.
Interesting huh? Now take a look here at his actual vote on HR 2764.
So shall we say that the NRCC ad is “inaccurate”?
Shall we say that it is an outright lie that is provable by public record? Something that Pete Olson wishes he had for his explanation on why it was that it was not he who voted in that Connecticut special election in 2003?
Kay Bailey Hutchison is the one that pushed that bill through her committee. She was approached by Alastair Rami who recorded his conversation with her, and asked her why some ads were saying that the bill inadequately funded the military.
Here is the conversation courtesy of BurntOrangeReport and You Tube
Now, I didn’t see the connection, exactly, with the inadequate funding claim and how the ad is inaccurate in that as well. I want to speculate that the version I have is brand spanking new. But it was nice to see that Kay Bailey Hutchison was so easy to set up against Olson and the NRCC.
I also thought that it was nice to see that the NRCC thinks that putting a tax on private health insurance is a bad, bad idea. Nice because it is something that John McCain thinks is a very good idea.
Odd, isn’t it? Usually the Republican Party is the party that has all their ducks in a row and stand arm in arm in solid agreement with each other, and it’s the Democrats that often look like buffoons as they disagree with everyone else, especially those in their own party.
Are we seeing yet another example of role reversal here?
Take a gander at the hit piece in this You Tube embed. Hit the pause button when you see the photo of the military jet taking off. You see in the lower left corner their citation of the house vote of the bill that Nick Lampson supposedly voted against on December 17, 2007.
Interesting huh? Now take a look here at his actual vote on HR 2764.
So shall we say that the NRCC ad is “inaccurate”?
Shall we say that it is an outright lie that is provable by public record? Something that Pete Olson wishes he had for his explanation on why it was that it was not he who voted in that Connecticut special election in 2003?
Kay Bailey Hutchison is the one that pushed that bill through her committee. She was approached by Alastair Rami who recorded his conversation with her, and asked her why some ads were saying that the bill inadequately funded the military.
Here is the conversation courtesy of BurntOrangeReport and You Tube
Now, I didn’t see the connection, exactly, with the inadequate funding claim and how the ad is inaccurate in that as well. I want to speculate that the version I have is brand spanking new. But it was nice to see that Kay Bailey Hutchison was so easy to set up against Olson and the NRCC.
I also thought that it was nice to see that the NRCC thinks that putting a tax on private health insurance is a bad, bad idea. Nice because it is something that John McCain thinks is a very good idea.
Odd, isn’t it? Usually the Republican Party is the party that has all their ducks in a row and stand arm in arm in solid agreement with each other, and it’s the Democrats that often look like buffoons as they disagree with everyone else, especially those in their own party.
Are we seeing yet another example of role reversal here?
1 comment:
very typical for republicans to start throwing the mud when they are desperate. They would do anything to win including cheat.
Post a Comment