Congressman Paul Kanjorski (D-PA) has been a fairly undistinguished member of the House of Representatives for nearly a quarter of a century. He is a career member of the Financial Services Committee who has made little or no name for himself since his first electoral victory, and has maintained incumbency through the funneling of pork back to his district. Even his Wikipedia entry says that Kanjorski "usually plays behind-the-scenes roles in the advocacy or defeat of legislation and steers appropriations money toward improving the infrastructure and economic needs of his district."
Never one to stand out in a crowd outside of his own district if he could help it up until now, Rep. Kanjorski's public life may be about to change in a major way very, very quickly, and for a very big reason.
You see, Paul Kanjorski has an honesty problem.
More specifically, Paul Kanjorski's problem is that he was publicly honest about the intentional dishonesty of Congressional Democrats (and Democrat candidates) in the run-up to the 2006 election -- particularly with regard to the War in Iraq.
Watch the video below (a transcript follows):
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."
The truth in Mr. Kanjorski's statement is both evident and obvious, and has been (to any who have been paying attention) since the Democrat out-of-Iraq-now campaigns began in early 2006. It has become more obvious with every bill the Democrat-led Congress passed that, rather than ending the war, simply gave the President nearly every single thing he asked for, without putting up any real fight (as opposed to the semifrequent, yet brief, preening-for-the-cameras moments of solely rhetorical dissent).
The impression the Democratic Congress gave during those minor-at-best wars over the continuation of the War was that it was simply incompetent. Reps. Pelosi, Hoyer, et al wanted to end the war as soon as possible -- at least, that's what they kept saying. Unfortunately for those who largely elected them on that basis, the best and brightest Democrats in elective office were simply unable to figure out any way to outsmart and outmaneuver the buffoon in the White House on the issues of wartime budget and policy, instead (inadvertently, I'm sure) ending every fight on the wrong side from their point of view, having yet again given the President every single thing he was asking for.
Now, Rep. Kanjorski has very publicly pulled the curtain back on the Democrat Congress' real intent and objective. "If we won the Congressional elections," he says, "we [implied that we] could stop the war." Yes, they did -- that is why the "Netroots" lined up behind these Democrats with their money and their soapboxes (but more importantly, with their money). That is why the "peace" activist supported them; ending the war NOW was the primary task they took on themselves to carry out, and the promise to do so was the basis on which so many of them were elected or reelected.
Now the mask slips -- and with it comes an admitted level of condescension directed by those Congressional Democrats at those who were gullible enough to support them for something that they themselves knew could not be done.
"Now anybody was a good student of Government," said Kanjorski, "would know that wasn't true [that they "could stop the war"]." Fortunately for those Democrats who campaigned, and were elected, based on their war-ending promises, their hardcore supporters, their activists, and their base of voters, are all made up of people who are, by Mr. Kanjorski's reckoning, very, very poor students of Government.
But all of that was justified to these incumbents and first-time candidates. Taking advantage of poor, uneducated rubes? Abusing trust, and leaving those who offered it stranded along the way? All acceptable -- because, again by Mr. Kanjorski's own description, of "the temptation to want to win back the Congress."
"We sort of stretched the facts," he says. "And people ate it up."
Yes, they did -- and that may well be an apt description of the fate awaiting Rep. Kanjorski himself once his fellow Congressional Democrats find out what secrets he has been publicly admitting.
After all, there is another election coming up in a mere five-plus months -- and they not only need the issue of their continued (purported) attempts to stop the war in order to gain support, but they need the votes of those same poor, poor students of government, who will believe every one of those stretched facts and, in the words of Mr. Kajorski, "eat up" what the Democrats had hoped to offer under the guise of something that was still eminently (and immintently) attainable under a their Congressional (and presidential) leadership.
Now, thanks to Mr. Kanjorski, that cat is out of the bag. He had better hope that those poor students of government are equally poor watchers of YouTube and followers of the news, or else the veneer of the Democrat promises on Iraq will be long gone, courtesy of his honesty problem.
I can relate.
I am new to a job with some Obama supporters. Before our state primary, one of them made a comment about the necessity of bringing our troops home. When I told her that wasn't gonna happen she looked kinda shocked and asked me why not. I hope I gave her a decent explanation of why we have to win this war and not declare defeat and retreat. I'm still working on winning her over to (ahem) the sane side.
atxcowgirl,
Good luck in trying to convert them over to the (ahem) sane side I know I've been trying it for years and it never works with some people.
BTW, where in Texas are you from? I was born in Abilene, and raised in Gorman.
If the Democrats had a veto-proof majority in both houses as well as the White House and we are still in Iraq, then I could see some merit to this post.
What I find wonderfully ironic is the blogger's contention that Democrats "misled some poor rubes" to take back power in Washington. (Never mind Jack Abramoff, Tom DeLay, historically low poll ratings for a second-term President, etc.) But wait a minute- how did we get into Iraq in the first place?
Oh yeah, scaring the bejesus out of the poor rubes with some nonsense about a smoking gun being a mushroom cloud....
I know! We should return power back to the Republicans. THen we would totally get out of Iraq and stop destroying our economy at the sake of Dubya's Excellent Iraq Mis-Adventure
If you were truly informed and knew what you were talking
about you would know that we would not be having this
problem if Carter and Clinton had not swept Saddam and Obama under the rug. Clinton was a womanizing coward and
all Carter cared about was his big fat ego...
So read the above blog for a demo that can tell the truth...
You are totally off the mark about returning power back to Republicans. The fact is, we should not be returning power back to anyone! No incumbent who has served two terms should be voted back into office. The clowns who occupy the halls of Congress need to have term limits thrust upon them. They won't enact it, so the voters need to take the bull by the horns and vote them out.
If you want to change the status quo you need to change the players. Remember, there's not a dime's worth of difference between the two parties. They just have different support bases. Once in office their agenda is their own.
Don't more and more college grads tend to join the Democratic party? You could say it's gotten to the point that our schools don't educate but rather anti-educate. Because the colleges sure seem to be producing a lot of fools. There's this guy that was elected to the Senate from Illinois who is Columbia and Harvard educated that thinks there are at least 57 states in the US. I think he's a more sincere Democrat since he wants to bring the troops home immediately. God help us.
Libs lied anti-war kooks cried.
Is there a vet running against him this fall? Can we find one?
I'm a "good student" of government, so I knew it all along (cheesy smile).
ROFLMFAO!
Democrats lie, what's new about that. Now they lie to their supporters, I say the supporters should have known they lie.
Democrats also said they would cut gas prices and protect freedom, more lies. The say anything do anything party will er umm, say anything and do anything to get elected.
Democrats, raise taxes, fund socialism and gun control. You figure out why gun control is so important to Democrats.
Kind of like Bill Clinton's promise to lower taxes for the middle class in 1992. That campaign promise was enough to get this voter who had always voted Democratic to cast my vote for him. Shortly after getting into office he said the numbers won't work so there is no tax cut. He then raised taxes on everything from Social Security payments to 'luxury' items like big screen TVs and boats. The boating industry went into a downturn shortly thereafter.
Mr Clinton's campaign lie has pushed me over to voting mostly Republican since then. It also makes me more aware anytime any Democrat says they will lower taxes because they will NOT lower taxes. In fact Governor Gregoire in Washington state said she would not raise taxes but when elected with a balanced budget she raised spending AND taxes!
I look at all of those college age voters now that Obama is bringing in to vote for perhaps the first time and thinking that once they realize what an empty suit of inexperience he really is that a lot of them will either never vote again or vote mostly Republican like me.
I worked for this man in PA for many years, Ive seen him put his foot in it many times but never this bad..what the hell is he thinking???..if mainstream media grabs this and runs with it he has just put a nail in the democratic coffin. I am just stunned. His "people" must be pulling their hair out today. I'd love to know how you got this video..
great reporting!!!
you hit the problem with the "if the MSM grabs this and runs with it" what do you think the odds are of that? if it was a replublican saying something like this, it would be 100%, but since it is a democrat i give it a 10% chance, at best.
Well ... the AP grabbed it.
Can you get more MSM?
Not to play devil's advocate, but be careful what you wish for. We Republicans bitched and moaned about fiscal responsibility for forty years and when we were finally granted a majority in the House and Senate, we spent like drunken sailors. I wonder if we'll ever be given a second chance.
Good luck to ya atxcowgirl. I know an Obama supporter where I work and nothing I say makes the slightest impression on him.
atxcowgirl-Good luck to you! The people who support obama are so out of touch with reality it's scary.
Keep whistling past that electoral graveyard! It's only a few more months until reality will slap you in the face: A Democratic president, at least 30 more Democratic seats in the House, a filibuster-proof Democratic Senate -- even after Lieberman switches parties.
The war will end, and so will a whole lot of other things. Better get ready.
"The war will end, and so will a whole lot of other things. Better get ready."
Here's a good example of a lefty inadvertently telling the truth.
Imagine my surprise...anyone who takes the effort to go beyond what the MSM and Democrats try to make us think..would not be surprised..the only surprise is a Democrat who is not yet so corrupted by power that the truth slipped out.
Obama supporters are not out of touch with reality, they are unhappy with reality and looking to change it. This election is purely a battle between those who are happy with the way things are and those who are not. Don't be surprised come November when the unhappy people sweep the GOP out of office. The GOP dug their own grave here. If GOP supporters are worried about what the Dems will do when they take over, they need to realize that they should have worked harder appease both sides over the last 8 years.
I am sick and tired of the anti-war crowd saying that President Bush and VP Cheney lied and scared the rubes into the war. President Bush, standing amidst the rubble of the WTC, the Pentagon and flight 93 understood that what we are up against is greater than anyone thought. The deaths of nearly 3,000 people killed on our own soil changed his life and his presidency.
For the record, although I know that you won't care to know the facts, VP Cheney said that "We cannot allow the next smoking gun to be a mushroom cloud over an American city."
The first smoking gun was the 9/11 attacks.
All you anti-war people, you have caused this war to last so long. Harvard did a study that showed that every time one of our Democratic "leaders" spoke against the war, the violence in Iraq went up. YOUR lies have given aid and comfort to our enemies. YOUR lies have given them the will to fight on in the belief that with enough violence and chaos, America will back down. The blood of the last 4 years is on YOUR hands.
The Democrats are willing to bring about the ruin of this country for political power. This little bit of honesty, probably never expected it to get out, is just a confirmation of what I have known since the elections of 2004.
Although this is certainly nothing new to this DAV/VFW, it is nice that perhaps ONE democrat has a conscience. I wonder if he will go by the way of Lieberman...
http://www.anewtone.com/2008/05/leftinistra-lied-about-iraq-and.html
This is indeed outrageous
I am sick and tired of the anti-war crowd saying that President Bush and VP Cheney lied and scared the rubes into the war.
I'd be sick of it if I were you, too. Not only does the truth hurt, but when Bush's latest approval rating is 23% and two-thirds of the public thinks the war was a waste and a lie, and is getting ready to give the Republicans the ass-kicking of their lives as a result of it, yeah, I'd be tired of it too.
All you anti-war people, you have caused this war to last so long. Harvard did a study that showed that every time one of our Democratic "leaders" spoke against the war, the violence in Iraq went up.
Wow, even for your side that's desperate.
first time i ve replied to a blog entry. for all the times i see the 23% or 27% or w/e % Mr Bush approval rating the media wants to use and /or be used by people who possibly might not think things thru. DID YOU EVER STOP TO THINK THE APPROVAL RATING OF CONGRESS (WHICH ALL 3 CANDIDATES BELONG) IS WHAT? NOW 13%..??...NICE ARGUMENT. come on think it thru, our minds are not bumper stickers.
good luck to all 3 candidates, they are going to need it..lol..
just a dumb texan. jim
Let's see of I got this right...
Folks are worried about the world running out
of oil, and yet we think we can run away from
Iraq, without consequences?
I'm not saying we went to war for oil, but if
we run away now, we screw ourselves.
Hypocrisy or Flip Flop: Obama Criticized Carter for talking to Hamas but Obama said he will talk to our enemies without precondition
Mr. Obama criticized former President Jimmy Carter for his recent meetings with Hamas leaders. At the same time, Obama said many times that he is the only candidate who will talk to our enemies without conditions - What do you call this? Flip flop or hypocrisy? You decide.
Even Obama’s far left media disagreed with him.
http://www.audacityofhypocrisy.com/2008/05/19/hypocrisy-or-flip-flop-oba...
“Obama is the only major candidate who supports tough, direct presidential diplomacy with Iran without preconditions.”
http://www.barackobama.com/issues/foreignpolicy/
Well, if these rubes understood the fact that no matter who is president, those troops are not coming home anytime soon, then they would realize that the dims are opportunistic traitors. To think that Iraq is ruining our economy, is true stupidity. The war is costing about 12 billion per month, but the way things are going now, that cost will drop by 1/3 to 1/2 over the next 6 months. Now we have a 3 trillion dollar budget, so the Iraq war is costing four percent of the budget. When you look at the fact that every department of the government is in shambles, urinating away money at an unprecedented level, what real fiscal effect does the war really have? The fact is that even with the costs of the war defense is at a historically low point.
So my advice to all you brain dead libs is that if you really want a candidate that will take us out of Iraq and surrender, you better find someone else. Obambi and Shrillary aren't gonna do and have admitted as much in the few candid moments during their so-called debates.
Actually there is nothing new here, Democrats lie all the time to get elected. Pelosi said she would bring down gas prices, didn't say a word about huge taxes for the global warming hoax ... The Democrat Socialists depend on ignorant voters -- You have to be ignorant to believe what liberals tell you.
The notion that Bush lied about the war is also a lie the liberals lap up, just like the stooges they are. Anyone remember the UN votes, the Congressional votes, oh yeah, those votes ... You their Hillary. Hey how about that Sen Rockefeller Senate floor speech about Iraq having nukes, wasn't that cool. Rockefeller was only the ranking member on the Intelligence Committee, I guess you don't need any intelligence for that job.
"Bush's latest approval rating is 23%"
10 points better than the Democrat Congress. Enjoy your rude awakening on Election Day.
Not only did the Democrats lie about their intentions regarding the war, but the Democrats used the war and the safety of US servicemen for partisan purposes.
A recent study by two Harvard economists shows that public dissent in the United States has caused increased attacks against civilians and American soldiers in Iraq, so for the purposes of obtaining partisan advantage, the Democrats in Congress found nothing wrong with putting American servicemen and Iraqi civilians in danger. And now, they joke about it.
This is shameful.
Anonymous, have you even READ the Harvard study, one produced on an extremely liberal campus? Here's the link.
http://people.rwj.harvard.edu/~riyengar/insurgency.pdf
If the math and science of the model are too complicated for you, just read the abstract and conclusions and you'll get the gist of it.
Now for my perspective. I've been to Iraq, voluntarily in 2007 on an embedded provincial reconstruction team. I have a veterinary degree and Ph.D. in pharmacology predating my commission in the Army right after 9-11. Some of us woke up that day while others hit the snooze bar. Stopping Saddam's genocide of the Kurds, his demonstrated technology and history of use of chemical weapons, his training and harboring of al Qaeda in the Salman Pak region of Baghdad, his funding and training of Abu Saef, his support of Ramzi Yousef of the 1993 WTC bombing, his destruction of oil fields, his forcing out of the Marsh Arabs by destroying their environment, his subsidizing of terrorism against Israel, his firing on Allied planes in the no-fly zone, and his violations of 17 U.N. resolutions with absolutely no teeth after invasion and devastation of the sovereign nation of Kuwait 12 years prior are not a waste, nor were those lies. Liberal moral equivalence arguments attempt to say that Bush and others are "like Hitler", instead of drawing the appropriate parallels of Hitler to Saddam, Ahmadinejad, Chavez, and Kim Jong Il. I've seen the improvements in Iraq and have the informed perspective that have been, and still are, an overwhelming force of good in the world while your self-loathing status is unsustainable for our nation on a large scale.
Thankfully, the President has more intestinal fortitude than to have your uneducated and agenda-driven opinion of him amount to anything, and that must frustrate you to no end - that you have been "combat ineffective" throughout his entire 8 years other than to rant behind the security of your keyboard, changing nothing.
As a proud servicemember and veteran, I will flat out tell you that you don't support the troops. In fact, those that say they "support the troops but not the war" rarely ever do, and they also don't care to ask our assessment. For the rare soldiers that agree with you, they are touted as the rule instead of the exception. For the vast majority who support the war because they've seen what good we've done, your mantra rings hollow, but they defend your sorry hide anyway. Have fun in your command as the 101st Fighting Keyboardists. McCain '08.
Amen brother!
Post new comment