I hate to keep harping on Mitch McConnell's re-election campaign, but every time I get in the car, there is a campaign ad on the radio. I'm still waiting on one where Mitch tells us something he has specifically done for his constituents. Time after time, his advertisements sling mud at his opponent, Matt Bevin. I've heard Mr. Bevin refute the McConnell allegations in interviews. Hearing all the smear tactics over and over just makes me mad. This is the stuff that makes many Americans mad. These tactics might win campaigns, but our opinion of Congress and politicians in general continues to fall to new lows every two years.
McConnell has been running ads lately about a speech Matt Bevin supposedly delivered at a rally for cock-fighting. The advertisements indicate that Matt Bevin supports legalization of cock-fighting. After all of the other advertisements alleging many things that seem to be false, should I believe this one? Regardless of whether the ad is truthful or not, I take this view. I couldn't care less if cock-fighting is legalized. It might be cruel, but the birds fight naturally. Their nature simply causes them to fight to the death when a rival bird is placed in the same vicinity with them. I would prefer that cock-fighting was illegal. However, in the overall scheme of things, cock-fighting is not a big, hot-button issue for me personally. On the other hand, Mitch voted to raise the debt ceiling. Mitch supported a bill last fall that provided a means for funding Obamacare. Mitch voted for a compromise bill that raised taxes. That vote not only raised taxes, it allowed the Democrats to increase spending while saying that it was a spending cut. Mitch's advertisements say that he forced the President to take spending cuts, while protecting 99% of Kentuckians from a tax increase. How's that for "a pattern of deception?"
Other Mitch McConnell ads say that Matt Bevin has lied about the Wall Street bailout. Mitch says that Matt Bevin claims to have opposed the bailouts, while his business were helped by them. You know, Matt's business may have benefited from the bailout, but that doesn't mean he would have voted for a bailout had he been in the Senate. It's entirely possible that Mr. Bevin may be a principled leader that isn't trying to get elected to the Senate for his own personal benefit. One thing that definitely should be considered is that Mitch McConnell did vote for the Wall Street bailout. Neither Mr. Bevin nor anyone else would have benefited from the Wall Street bailout had they not been passed by Congress with votes by Mitch McConnell and other career politicians in the Washington establishment. While we're not sure about Matt Bevin's principles, Mitch McConnell has only one principle: to get re-elected at all cost.
It never ceases to amaze and anger me when the MessAPolitico is running for office, and they accuse their opponents of supporting the things they have actually done. It also is amazing that the media is willing to let these things pass without a challenge.
Mitch McConnell may get selected to run on the Republican ticket in November. He very well may win the primary in Kentucky next week. If so, it will be a shame. Mitch may be a conservative as his advertisements allege. He might even fight for the advancement of conservatism in the Senate. The problem is that he never wins those fights. You might say that it's hard to get anything passed when the Republicans only control the House, while the Democrats have the Senate and the White House. I say that winning is no big accomplishment when your party controls all three. A real leader can get things done like Reagan did with the Democrats controlling the House and Senate. A real leader can get Democrat President Bill Clinton to sign a balanced budget from the Republican controlled House and Senate. Real leaders would just do the right thing and follow their principles. Their election or re-election would happen because of their accomplishments instead of their mudslinging misrepresentations.
No comments:
Post a Comment